372 Yonge | 248m | 74s | Yonge & Gerrard Partners | DIALOG

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,151
Reaction score
34,268
Location
Davenport
Another major development in the works at Yonge & Gerrard. Based on the addresses of all properties involved in the project, this will consume the entire block on the west side of Yonge from Gerrard to Walton St.


372 YONGE ST
Ward 11 - Tor & E.York District


Proposal for a 74-storey mixed-use building comprised of 3693.10 square metres of non-residential floor area and 32,178.20 square metres of residential gross floor area. A total of 406 residential dwelling units are proposed.


1596114876766.png

1596114800174.png
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
15,745
Reaction score
32,482
Location
Toronto/EY
Hmmm,

The corner property at Gerrard is historically designated; while every other property on the block is 'listed' in the heritage registry.

1596116228764.png


Note that pink is designated (protected), yellow is listed.

A quick scan shows the date of construction of the various buildings.

372 Yonge: 1864
374 Yonge: 1862, 1892
376 Yonge: 1865
378/380 Yonge: 1930
 

jje1000

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
4,839
Reaction score
2,333
Could see them doing a 1 Yorkville on this, maybe replacing the Shisha Pasha lounge building at most.

Personally, I don’t mind, as it’s a strange-yet-unique Toronto typology, and there are plenty of other unhindered lots in the city for fancy new street fronts (not that many of them have been successes, mind you).
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
15,745
Reaction score
32,482
Location
Toronto/EY
Could see them doing a 1 Yorkville on this, maybe replacing the Shisha Pasha lounge building at most.

Personally, I don’t mind, as it’s a strange-yet-unique Toronto typology, and there are plenty of other unhindered lots in the city for fancy new street fronts (not that many of them have been successes, mind you).

The last time I was in there, a few years back, the designated building on the corner, (380) had enough historical left in the interior to recommend its retention in whole.

I can't say w/certainty, but I suspect there is very little heritage left to save behind the facades further south.

372 has been so badly molested on the outside, I don't know if there is or was anything worth restoring there.

Found old photos of these properties from the Archive! Photos from 1950

372:

1596120290279.png



374:

1596120378161.png


376:

1596120420157.png


380:

1596120481818.png


Fond Series here:

 
Last edited:

jje1000

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
4,839
Reaction score
2,333
The last time I was in there, a few years back, the designated building on the corner, (380) had enough historical left in the interior to recommend its retention in whole.

I can't say w/certainty, but I suspect there is very little heritage left to save behind the facades further south.

372 has been so badly molested on the outside, I don't know if there is or was anything worth restoring there.

Found old photos of these properties from the Archive! Photos from 1950
1596120290279-png.260669

I think that if you strip off the overclad tile, the brick will still be there, and the roofline is a trivially easy thing to restore- there have been buildings in a far more compromised state that have been wonderfully resurrected with far more effort. That being said, is it worth retaining what even the Victorians regarded as a simple building, which would have likely been replaced with a more stately structure in time?

It really depends on how much faith you have in the replacement structure not being a side-step at best, or even a step-down in terms of quality- which are unfortunate plausibilities.

IMO- the replacement structure should either be of exceptional architectural quality (unlikely)- or at the minimum, it should aim to be a good neighbour to the other structures on the block in retaining a coherent urban fabric.
 
Last edited:

ADRM

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 2, 2015
Messages
5,520
Reaction score
16,104
IMO- the replacement structure should either be of exceptional architectural quality (unlikely)- or at the minimum, it should aim to be a good neighbour to the other structures on the block in retaining a coherent urban fabric.

And, to that end, I'm very interested (and perhaps a touch scared) to see who the proponent is here; there are a whole bunch of aesthetically challenged developers that have taken an interest in this part of the Yonge corridor in recent years (Canderel, Lifetime, Plaza, and Lanterra [though 11 Wellesley, Tea House, and 50 Scollard perhaps indicate a welcome change of course]). And then on the brighter side, you've also got MOD (and Cresford, but obviously that's not gonna be a thing).

Who are the other big ones that haven't been super active on this particular part of the corridor but might be taking a swing at this? Tridel? Great Gulf? Pemberton? Menkes? CentreCourt? Concord (shudder)?
 

3Dementia

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
2,757
Reaction score
2,517
Now you got me shuddering ... Camrost, and confess I still have Pinnacle nightmares (unless they clad SkyTower as promised and don't run out of red brick veneer on that other project).

I'd love a MOD but not sure they 74 storeys of pocket change.

P.S. (had a nap and dreamed it was Wilkinson Eyre and Hines teaming up for a residential build).
 
Last edited:

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,731
Reaction score
8,712
Location
Midtown Toronto
Difficult to speculate without knowing more information. It could be Diamondcorp or some other firm that does land entitlement that is working on this land assembly with intention to sell.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
15,745
Reaction score
32,482
Location
Toronto/EY
I think that if you strip off the overclad tile, the brick will still be there, and the roofline is a trivially easy thing to restore- there have been buildings in a far more compromised state that have been wonderfully resurrected with far more effort. That being said, is it worth retaining what even the Victorians regarded as a simple building, which would have likely been replaced with a more stately structure in time?

In the case of 272 at the southern limit of the site, it's clear that the original windows are gone, but so is much of the ground floor brick.

I think you make a good case about the more pedestrian structures on the block; and I wouldn't necessarily lament their loss the way I would 380.

That said, simply looking at the practicalities there's been a lot damage to that particular property.

I'm assuming they would either have to go searching for reclaimed brick or try to make new, custom-match to restore that particular building.
 
Last edited:

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,151
Reaction score
34,268
Location
Davenport
Yonge & Gerrard is the future King & Bay (in terms of building heights).

Makes you wonder if we'll see something happen at the NE corner of Yonge & Gerrard in the future. Although there may be less flexibility there, as the heritage building where Rexall and Boston Pizza is at has been recently renovated, and likely to remain intact as is. The other major projects within direct radius of this intersection are the Chelsea Green and whatever is planned at 415 Yonge.
 

AlbertC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
16,151
Reaction score
34,268
Location
Davenport
Fwiw, there are several interior photos of 378 Yonge here (corner building at Gerrard). Looks like Meta Cannabis had completed quite an extensive restoration of the heritage detailing when they opened.

 

Towered

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
6,744
Reaction score
5,863
Apart from the old bank building on the corner, for the rest of the block I think we'll get the token facade retention at best.
 

Top