alklay
Senior Member
Its just a placeholder 2 story or so retail building (and with an emphasis on the rendering not being final).
Toronto 335 Yonge | 55.2m | 16s | Lalani | Zeidler
- Thread starter newyears1974
- Start date
urbandreamer
recession proof
It's not the Tetris Hotel is it?
Didn't think so.
Compare to how it looked in the '60s:
via twitter user @Shelaay
Didn't think so.
Compare to how it looked in the '60s:
Last edited:
androiduk
Senior Member
urbandreamer
recession proof
Thanks. Looks very P+S. Needs red brick & aA+ architecture here.
bAuHaUs
Active Member
Thanks androiduk.
It looks very preliminary, especially the tower. All very pre-planning application, pre-Design Review Panel, pre-everything.
42
42
Mongo
Senior Member
Agreed. To me, the tower in the render looks like a generic placeholder image, to be used in initial marketing of the podium before the massing and design of the real tower has been set. I think that right now, they want to find out the level of interest there is in commercial podium space at this intersection, which would help determine the podium massing.
I have to think that a tower at this location would sell like hotcakes -- assuming that the City allows it.
I have to think that a tower at this location would sell like hotcakes -- assuming that the City allows it.
khris
Senior Member
I was surprised to come into this thread and see a new render, but no mention of the news from today about the guy who set the place on fire.
Yonge and Gould arsonist gets 10 years in jail
Yonge and Gould arsonist gets 10 years in jail
J T CUNNINGHAM
Senior Member
"news from today about the guy who set the place on fire."
QUOTE khristopher.
From the above link provided above:
"A forensic neuroscientist testified he has the mind of a child and a personality disorder that includes pyromania.
He is violent, addicted to drugs and enjoyed seeing people suffer, court heard. When he admitted to setting fire at the Empress Hotel, he was already on probation for arson."
(The) idiots are running the asylum!
Regards,
J T
QUOTE khristopher.
From the above link provided above:
"A forensic neuroscientist testified he has the mind of a child and a personality disorder that includes pyromania.
He is violent, addicted to drugs and enjoyed seeing people suffer, court heard. When he admitted to setting fire at the Empress Hotel, he was already on probation for arson."
(The) idiots are running the asylum!
Regards,
J T
Mongo
Senior Member
So evidently the authorities felt there was no chance that he would resume burning down buildings.
On the other hand, it is sounding more likely that the Lalani Group had nothing directly to do with this act of arson (although they are likely still guilty of "demolition by neglect").
J T CUNNINGHAM
Senior Member
"more likely that the Lalani Group had nothing directly to do with this act of arson "
QUOTE: Mongo.
"Good things" come to those that wait.
Regards,
J T
QUOTE: Mongo.
"Good things" come to those that wait.
Regards,
J T
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
That's what kills me, the Lalani Group will make out very handsomely for not repairing that fallen wall and then not protecting the building from homeless folks and an arsonist. They make out like bandits and the city loses a historic structure at one of the most high profile areas in the city.
In the end this is a great location for a highrise and retail space but some serious work and thought needs to be put into the design.
In the end this is a great location for a highrise and retail space but some serious work and thought needs to be put into the design.
CanadianNational
Senior Member
Arson or no arson, the Lalani Group sat on that building until it literally fell apart. Short of forcing them to rebuild it brick by brick, I think justice demands the city should expropriate the site from their feckless hands without recompense, and sell it to someone else.
J T CUNNINGHAM
Senior Member
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold building standards; they did not.
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold engineering standards before construction of the new aluminium facing; they did not.
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold construction & safety standards re the above; they did not.
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold safety standards after the incident; they did not.
The City of Toronto has the right & means to expropriate private property for public works; they did not.
BUT
The City of Toronto has no right & hopefully no means to steal private property because, in this case, they screwed-up.
Regards,
J T
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold engineering standards before construction of the new aluminium facing; they did not.
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold construction & safety standards re the above; they did not.
The City of Toronto had the right & means to force the owner to uphold safety standards after the incident; they did not.
The City of Toronto has the right & means to expropriate private property for public works; they did not.
BUT
The City of Toronto has no right & hopefully no means to steal private property because, in this case, they screwed-up.
Regards,
J T
fedplanner
Active Member
These series of events are too convenient for the developer... However, there is no evidence linking them to the arson. Is the developer negligent due to the deteriorated condition of the property?
I wonder if it would be possible to implement a tax rebate program or some other mechanism to ensure that existing heritage properties are well maintained and kept in productive use.
-edit
At least robust code enforcement with substantial fines for noncompliance so something like this never happens again.
Last edited: