Register123
Active Member
Why do they have to demolish buildings in this city when there are hundreds of parking lots, makes no sense.
Why do they have to demolish buildings in this city when there are hundreds of parking lots, makes no sense.
As promised earlier some pictures of the building in question. From what I can tell from walking around it today the shell of it is about the only thing that has any historical value left. It looks like half of it go a facade job back in the 80's not to mention two additional floors. IMO it would make a great base for a super tall.
I passed by the existing building yesterday. It looks a bit like a 20's building that had a makeover/extension in the 80's. A little plain and Frankenstein-ish but I like it! Does anyone know its history?
From AndrewJM3D at Skyscraper City:
All in all, a comparatively "uninspiring" example of architecture from that era. Given the obvious hack jobs that it's already endured over the years, I've become more amenable to this building getting a facadectomy if it means the exterior getting restored to its original condition. Still, this location really should be designated for an office tower.
Isn't this then an argument for razing the site and starting with a clean slate? Why incorporate "uninspiring, hacked-up" architecture"? This tendency of Toronto is becoming eccentric.
Isn't this then an argument for razing the site and starting with a clean slate? Why incorporate "uninspiring, hacked-up" architecture"? This tendency of Toronto is becoming eccentric.
Isn't this then an argument for razing the site and starting with a clean slate? Why incorporate "uninspiring, hacked-up" architecture"? This tendency of Toronto is becoming eccentric.