Canadian Chocho
Active Member
So where is the hideousness exactly?
I agree it was pointless for the city to designate this building as heritage. As long as I can remember this block of building has looked like it was about to cave in on itself. You can tell just by looking at the structure that it is not on a sound footing anymore. It is beyond being saved by restoration and would have to be rebuilt from the ground up. Who would even propose such a heritage designation? KWT? Is she so clueless about real-estate?
What they should do is tear down this block and replace it with a replica of what the building looked like brand new (without the first floor additions which ruined the look of the building). To make it attractive for the building owner I would let them add on a six story condo/apt addition on the back. As it stands now none of the businesses are of interest to me. I will not eat in any of the three food establishments because I read that the building is full of cockroaches. A brand new building with brand new tenants would give the village a shot in the arm.
Who would even propose such a heritage designation? KWT? Is she so clueless about real-estate?
I'm curious as to what features you've identified as indicating the building is not on sound ground, and incapable of preservation?
Honestly they should axe this building. I know it may have some "heritage" qualities, but no visual qualities that are extraordinary. Plus the damage on this building is probably far too significant.
Oh dear....You're obviously not a fan of heritage! Totally should revoke your gay card!
Beneath the disrepair lies a really handsome building! Toronto's "victorian era" buildings/housing stock just takes my breath away! The craftsmanship and masonry work -- all but forgotten trades -- can't even be produced today! That just boggles my mind. It's crazy that townhomes made in this city in 2013 look like such dreck and 100+ years ago they were so ornate and spectacular! /end rant.
I also can't believe how long it's taken to designate these buildings as heritage and wonder what good it is now. They will just fall into further neglect; I imagine the owners cannot foot the bill to restore it to its former glory. As it's been said many times on this forum, this city is far too lenient on absentee landlords. It's ridiculous, why aren't there stiffer penalties and laws for these speculators and people who don't even live in the city/couldn't careless about its makeup.
I'm a fan of heritage. But I probably can't see the qualities as this building is cluttered with singns and 2nd floor patio fences. Regardess I was walking past this building yesterday, and the middle section along Church is LITERALLY sinking in. There's no way to save this.
I'm a fan of heritage. But I probably can't see the qualities as this building is cluttered with singns and 2nd floor patio fences. Regardess I was walking past this building yesterday, and the middle section along Church is LITERALLY sinking in. There's no way to save this.
No, but I would bet the value is in the land not in the current building. (Though I would certainly like to see it properly restored and preserved.) The problem really is that the City lacks the power to force owners of historic buildings to maintain them properly (until they actually become dangerous when it's usually too late.) Remember Walnut Hall on Shuter?, ... do you have any idea of what this plot of property is worth?