Project Essentials / dataBase – detailed project information, floor plans, renderings
Projects & Construction Thread  I  Real Estate Thread
O2 Toronto 
102 Shuter St., Toronto
Developer: Identity Developments, Stal Inc.


O2 Toronto | 48m | 14s | Identity | P + S / IBI

BMyers

Active Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
311
Reaction score
5
Looks like Walnut Hall will be demolished to make way for a 18-20 storey condominium with 69 units.
 

DSC

Senior Member
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
9,838
Reaction score
4,463
Location
St Lawrence Market Area
Looks like Walnut Hall will be demolished to make way for a 18-20 storey condominium with 69 units.

Looks like you have just woken from a lengthy sleep, the Walnut Hall collapsed (finally helped by the City) about 18 months ago.

This thread is actually about the HOTEL which is actually not on the WH site but right on the corner of Jarvis and Shuter.

The condo building to which you refer IS where WH (102 Shuter Street) was and a planning application was made in November 2008 for: Planning applicantion for Condominium 8893m2 - All residential - 69 suites - 18-20 storey tower, Complete with 4 levels below grade parking with 56 parking space.

MODS may want to move all this to a new thread?
 

BMyers

Active Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2008
Messages
311
Reaction score
5
Sorry I didn't realize it was already demolished. I just mentioned this here because the Walnut Hall was referenced in this thread. Althought I appreciate the your attempt at comedy. Hiberation humour is pretty fresh.

For that new thread on 102 Shuter, the applicant is the Galrich Corporation.
 

GraphicMatt

Looking forward to a FRESH START for Toronto
Joined
May 13, 2008
Messages
3,039
Reaction score
3
There's a sign posted as of tonight about this development. The building will include a bunch of town houses at ground level that face onto Shuter. Could be interesting.
 

Tewder

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
5,401
Reaction score
150
It will be a bitter pill to swallow if those townhouses are faux historic.
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
25,439
Reaction score
12,017
Location
Toronto
Interesting that they couldn't be bothered to move when the properties are still around, but was so quick to jump to development once they're gone.

Deny the application.

AoD
 

Towered

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,543
Reaction score
1,141
Make them rebuild Walnut Hall, brick by brick. It would send a much needed message that demolition-through-neglect of heritage structures will not be tolerated in this city. And the city itself should pay part of the cost because they didn't enforce the most basic maintenance to be done despite having the obligation to do so.
 

Archivist

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,349
Reaction score
2
I agree with Towered. I miss Walnut Hall. Damn them!
 

maestro

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
6,761
Reaction score
1,653
The current ownership group had the property for less than a few months prior to collapse and I see no reason to assume their announced intentions to preserve the facade as part of a larger building were devious in nature.

And the city itself should pay part of the cost because they didn't enforce the most basic maintenance to be done despite having the obligation to do so.

There's really not much they can do especially back when the Feds own it. Work orders only go so far.
 

Torontovibe

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
5,570
Reaction score
668
Location
Toronto
Somebody should be held responsible. It's not like the city didn't know the thing was falling apart. I called Pam McConnell 3 times and I called the mayors office BEFORE it fell down. I told them over and over, that is was not safe and would crumble soon. Each time I was told they'd look into it and there is not much they could do. SOMEBODY is responsible for the collapse and should be held accountable. I think it should have to be rebuilt as it was.
 

Torontovibe

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
5,570
Reaction score
668
Location
Toronto
The current ownership group had the property for less than a few months prior to collapse and I see no reason to assume their announced intentions to preserve the facade as part of a larger building were devious in nature.




There's really not much they can do especially back when the Feds own it. Work orders only go so far.
Whoever bought that property must have had it inspected quite thoroughly and must have known the situation it was in. If they decided to buy it, knowing that, and expecting to redevelop the site, too bad for them. They should have immediately done something to save that building, which they did not do. These MFers should not be rewarded. At the very least, the height of this building should not be higher than 3 floors, just like Walnut hall. Developers should be dealt with very strictly.
 

maestro

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
6,761
Reaction score
1,653
Whoever bought that property must have had it inspected quite thoroughly and must have known the situation it was in. If they decided to buy it, knowing that, and expecting to redevelop the site, too bad for them. They should have immediately done something to save that building, which they did not do. These MFers should not be rewarded. At the very least, the height of this building should not be higher than 3 floors, just like Walnut hall. Developers should be dealt with very strictly.
The parties responsible have long already been rewarded. I don't think limiting the height to three storeys out of spite is in the best interest of the city either. This site is better served with something at least three times that height.

Just because it collapsed doesn't mean the new owner didn't try everything to save it. I did see them anchoring the facade at the time of collapse.
 
Last edited:

Towered

Senior Member
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
3,543
Reaction score
1,141
The city cannot enforce property standards outside of their jurisdiction. In this case Walnut Hall was owned for years by the RCMP which created the initial condition of decay and an expensive restoration for the buyers.
Then the RCMP should be made to foot part of the bill for reconstruction as well. Spread the love.
 

junctionist

Senior Member
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
8,201
Reaction score
1,265
Location
The Junction, Toronto
Limiting just the height of the new building out of spite isn't a good idea. You either limit the entire design of the building to what was there before and thus mandate it to be rebuilt or nothing.
 

Top