Miscellany Toronto Photographs: Then and Now

the lemur · Sep 25, 2015

J T CUNNINGHAM said:
"But the coffin block was shorter than the Gooderham. Where were additions made to create the Gooderham?"
the lemur

The Coffin Block later included an extention, see S/S 1885.

Gooderham ordered the Coffin Block to be demolished. The later building also has one more storey. How exactly did that work?

J T CUNNINGHAM · Sep 25, 2015

"Gooderham ordered the Coffin Block to be demolished. The later building also has one more storey. How exactly did that work?"
the lemur

To make a long story short and as I had just mentioned previously on this thread and on another, a number of years ago,

after the Coffin was carried off-in waggons, The Gooderham building was erected on it's present site; two walls, one

fronting to the South, North side of Front Street and another, fronting to the North, South side of Wellington Street,

with the address being that of 49 Wellington Street East.

The building did not have it's own West Wall as built and does not presently have it's own West Wall; the "wall "

that we see, is there at the pleasure of and owned by The City of Toronto, it originally being that of the East Wall

of the a now demolished previous building; the Mural is also within The City's domain.

J T

thecharioteer · Sep 26, 2015

J T CUNNINGHAM said:
The building did not have it's own West Wall as built and does not presently have it's own West Wall; the "wall "

that we see, is there at the pleasure of and owned by The City of Toronto, it originally being that of the East Wall

of the a now demolished previous building; the Mural is also within The City's domain.

J T

I dunno, JT. As can be seen in the old photos below, the Gooderham Building was taller than the building which stood to the west, so it would have to have had its own west wall. Besides that, I don't think the building permit rules were substantially different in the 1890's in that buildings require their own structural integrity on their own sites.

J T CUNNINGHAM · Sep 26, 2015

" As can be seen in the old photos below, the Gooderham Building was taller than the building which stood to the west, so it would have to have had its own west wall. Besides that, I don't think the building permit rules were substantially different in the 1890's in that buildings require their own structural integrity on their own sites."
Thecharioteer.

There is an Old Saw that begins: "Everything being equal . . . "

Then again, never discount the presence and force of a man with the name of George H Gooderham.

This two sided building's North and South Walls, were bonded into/with, the the former and now demolished West bulding,

said wall being structural to both, it however, is not a financial asset of 49 West, it being wholly owned by The City of Toronto.

The increased in hight of the wall and it's two chimneys were additions to the existing above noted wall to extend it's coverage

and utility only.

When one is to look at the inside, First Floor, North West corner office, the remains of a formerly outside painted advertisement

will be seen. Also to be noted, there are no fireplaces that are integrated into the wall in question, they being in another location.

Kind regards,
J T

the lemur · Sep 27, 2015

J T CUNNINGHAM said:
The Gooderham building was erected on it's present site; two walls, one

fronting to the South, North side of Front Street and another, fronting to the North, South side of Wellington Street,

with the address being that of 49 Wellington Street East.

The building did not have it's own West Wall as built and does not presently have it's own West Wall; the "wall "

that we see, is there at the pleasure of and owned by The City of Toronto, it originally being that of the East Wall

of the a now demolished previous building; the Mural is also within The City's domain.

I have no idea what you're trying to say here - it seems like something's getting lost in the weightiness of your explanation.

The building doesn't have its own west wall since that's actually the east wall of a now vanished building, is that right? The north and south walls of the Gooderham reused those of the Coffin Block?

J T CUNNINGHAM · Sep 27, 2015

"The north and south walls of the Gooderham reused those of the Coffin Block?"
the lemur.

No.

J T

Anna · Sep 27, 2015

Because the top floor wall isn't a wall it's a roof?

Did the owners of the Gooderham building have any say in where the windows went?

J T CUNNINGHAM said:
"Gooderham ordered the Coffin Block to be demolished. The later building also has one more storey. How exactly did that work?"
the lemur

To make a long story short and as I had just mentioned previously on this thread and on another, a number of years ago,

after the Coffin was carried off-in waggons, The Gooderham building was erected on it's present site; two walls, one

fronting to the South, North side of Front Street and another, fronting to the North, South side of Wellington Street,

with the address being that of 49 Wellington Street East.

The building did not have it's own West Wall as built and does not presently have it's own West Wall; the "wall "

that we see, is there at the pleasure of and owned by The City of Toronto, it originally being that of the East Wall

of the a now demolished previous building; the Mural is also within The City's domain.

J T