Toronto 55 Yonge | 232.86m | 68s | H&R REIT | PARTISANS

ProjectEnd said:
Confirming they are starting internal demo here:
Click to expand...

Indeed!

Per the above, they do not require permits for most internal works; they do not yet have the permit for structural demolition, though it is an open file:

1744919091603.png


No activity on file since July '24.
 
So what ended up happening with the proposal next to this building? I remember hearing a while back that it was supposed to make the the developers of this project buy the property or air rights or something to secure the view. Did they ever come to an agreement, and is that why construction’s starting now?
 
H&R REIT spends $80m on site.

UT Forum:

1772218506870.png



Laughing aside, 55 Yonge has been owned by H&R REIT for over 20 years
 

Attachments

  • 1772216870732.png
    1772216870732.png
    170.8 KB · Views: 14
err so we all know this is probably going to end up as a surface parking lot for a decade ? :mad::(:rolleyes:
 
taal said:
err so we all know this is probably going to end up as a surface parking lot for a decade ? :mad::(:rolleyes:
Click to expand...
Toronto, more often than not, is a city shaped by bean counters, and not by city builders - H&R REIT sticking a parking lot in the middle of the core is driven by the same sort of calculations (spreadsheets) that give Toronto its utilitarian condo architecture. I don't mean to be overly dramatic/pessimistic, as I do really appreciate the ambition of some people/companies to leave a positive mark on the city, but that ambition is very rare in this city (rarely makes it past the sort of dishonest drawings used to rezone this property)
 
Vast majority of democratic cities are shaped by bean counters and most of their cores have vacant sites left by demolition. I think you're grossly undervaluing Toronto's condo architecture. The preponderance of window wall vs curtain wall and copious amounts of spandrel is a symptom of a market that is grossly unaffordable above a hotel suite sized unit on a floor with 12 units and in a 600 plus unit tower with 4 elevators. The quality of the finishes is the focus of the architecture. Guggenheim Museum Bilbao vs Frank Gehry's Santa Monica house.
 
maestro said:
Vast majority of democratic cities are shaped by bean counters and most of their cores have vacant sites left by demolition. I think you're grossly undervaluing Toronto's condo architecture. The preponderance of window wall vs curtain wall and copious amounts of spandrel is a symptom of a market that is grossly unaffordable above a hotel suite sized unit on a floor with 12 units and in a 600 plus unit tower with 4 elevators. The quality of the finishes is the focus of the architecture. Guggenheim Museum Bilbao vs Frank Gehry's Santa Monica house.
Click to expand...
The quality of finishes on new buildings in most western European cities or Melbourne/Sydney put Toronto to shame. City Place and Liberty Village (not even going to talk about Etobicoke/Scarborough) were covered by (mostly grey) spandrel window wall long before the units became unaffordable, back when the pre-construction units were sold at a discount to resale values to entice people to take the risk. The new wave of apartment buildings from Tricon and Fitzrovia have demonstrated a higher standard than Toronto's condo architecture. I'm not saying that there are no good looking condos in Toronto (my original post noted exceptions), or that all new apartment buildings are getting built to a higher standard, but I expect that the shift from condos to apartments will have a positive overall effect on Toronto's architecture (given that the apartment buildings are not getting leased off a piece of paper for the next 50+ years)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top