Discussion in 'Projects & Construction (high and mid-rise)' started by AlbertC, Jun 23, 2011.
Well, I am no NIMBY, but I would be very sorry to see this building go...
let's see if the image attached ... if not, here is google map of the address:
<iframe width="425" height="350" frameborder="0" scrolling="no" marginheight="0" marginwidth="0" src="http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2+Gloucester+Street,+Toronto,+Ontario&layer=c&sll=43.666749,-79.384968&cbp=13,15.06,,0,-16.36&cbll=43.666499,-79.38521&hl=en&gl=ca&sspn=0.006295,0.006295&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=2+Gloucester+St,+Toronto,+Toronto+Division,+Ontario+M4Y+1L1&ll=43.666749,-79.384968&spn=0.000487,0.000862&t=h&z=14&panoid=k8GH1-xjwMZgtE-iLe9vBA&source=embed&output=svembed"></iframe><br /><small><a href="http://maps.google.ca/maps?q=2+Gloucester+Street,+Toronto,+Ontario&layer=c&sll=43.666749,-79.384968&cbp=13,15.06,,0,-16.36&cbll=43.666499,-79.38521&hl=en&gl=ca&sspn=0.006295,0.006295&ie=UTF8&hq=&hnear=2+Gloucester+St,+Toronto,+Toronto+Division,+Ontario+M4Y+1L1&ll=43.666749,-79.384968&spn=0.000487,0.000862&t=h&z=14&panoid=k8GH1-xjwMZgtE-iLe9vBA&source=embed" style="color:#0000FF;text-align:left">View Larger Map</a></small>
This is one of the finest heritage buildings on Yonge street - one of my favorites - and they want to redevelop the site for a condo
wow! no no no .
Well the City let the Edison crumble and eventually burn down, why not wipe out other beautiful building on downtown Yonge. This city is really starting to SUCK.
Here's a picture that I took of the building in the summer of 2009
Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.
I agree this is WRONG. And DT is right... if this happens I would deffinately say the City is starting to SUCK.... I might be OK with it if The building became the base of the new Condo kinda like the building underneith Shangri-La or the building under BA Centre... But just knocking it over should be a crime.... This might be a unwarrented fear, but I fear that because FORD just wants to see development downtown and only downtown, we are going to have a lower standard about what passes at CITY HALL.. (BTW I do realize some shitty things happened under MILLER)
How are they going to do this when condo units already exist in the Masonic Building. What if some of the owners don't want to sell?
^ You make them an offer they can't refuse.
No need to worry, stock market crashing today, I would wager that most likely less than half of what is proposed for Toronto will get built in the next 10 years. This next dip by some estimates will make Lehman going under look like child's play.
They should keep their hands off this building.
I really hope this turns out as well as Five St. Joseph.
They'd better not touch the Masonic Hall.
I would be surprised if the city would allow it. It is listed as a heritage property.
The back where the restaurant is seems to be an add on, and the Club and Pizza place are in a refitted historical-looking house. I could see this part of the site as the part they are targeting for demolition.
The problem here is, I imagine any company going through all this trouble would seek the maximum height allowable, which given the new norms popping up on Yonge might fall at around fifty or sixty floors or so. This would loom unconscionably over the Temple building, and likely wreck the existing gateway to Gloucester, which, with it's low-rise buildings and mature trees, is charming in scale, relates to the immediate neighbourhood to the east, and is a relief from Yonge.
The interior of the Masonic Hall might also get further carved up and subdivided to maximize the number of units and profits. God forbid we get some monstrous mishmash like the one planned on Grenville.
am i the only one thats creeped out by this being posted at 00:00??
No one hold me to this....as its hearsay............
But I believe that what is proposed to to demolish the building to the east, not the principle heritage property.
I believe everything up the laneway is assembled.
The proposal involves some sort of tower tucked in.
If I'm wrong and this turns out to be a threat to the principle heritage property...I will very very irritated.