Toronto 619 Yonge | 237.99m | 70s | YI Developments | Core Architects

[Automation Gallery]

Nope, that is 623 Yonge to the south of 627. There isn't actually a 625 Yonge St, so it might very well be both properties on the chopping block.

Yeah i think its both properties, which are both crappy.....http://goo.gl/maps/vWKDn even the older bldg.... they have destroyed the facade with the larger windows

...now this block just south and next door is worth keeping, ......http://goo.gl/maps/PwZJK big difference ehh.

 

[robere]

Nope, that is 623 Yonge to the south of 627. There isn't actually a 625 Yonge St, so it might very well be both properties on the chopping block.

Thanks for the clarification. In some ways, I would prefer it was the generic 2 storey building to the south instead of the older 3 storey building where Komrads / Bar One used to be (for those who remember). There might be nice bricks under all that white paint !

 

[ganjavih]

You're not alone or a freak. There's not only the historical significance, but it's important to remember the most vibrant streets in cities around the world are lined with old narrow lowrise buildings. This is virtually universal. We already have a bland, sterile street lined with concrete and glass towers a block away on Bay... I don't see the purpose of turning Yonge St into that. And then there's the Mirvish/Gehry plan to transform a pleasant, urban stretch of King West lined with handsome century buildings into a jumbled mess that's anything but urban. But, alas, this is a place where the almighty dollar has more influence that any urban-minded city planner does.

Errrrrr.....uuummmmmm........yeah, is there going to be anything left of Yonge street, or is it to be wall to wall glass and steel in a few years, does city council have any comprehension of the word "no"???? So much for retaining ANY of TO's heritage and history! What a pisser! At first, at the beginning of the condo boom around 2005, I was so excited to see so much going up so fast, and I never thought I'd say it, but enough already! Leave Yonge alone, it's one of the last remaining hints of our culture, and it's about to be bulldozed over? I know saying this means nothing to a developer with bags of cash, but we've got to have limits. I've talked about this in previous threads, but it bears repeating, is it ethical, or socially responsible to allow our history to be erased in favour of some gaudy monstrosity that will fall apart in a few decades? I've been doing a little research, some of the original structures on Yonge, particularly between Dundas and Bloor, are almost 150 years old (a few even older). I know many of you are thinking "so what?", I guess I'm a freak, I have a silly sentimental attachment to my city's long and rich history, am I alone in thinking this?

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Thanks for the clarification. In some ways, I would prefer it was the generic 2 storey building to the south instead of the older 3 storey building where Komrads / Bar One used to be (for those who remember). There might be nice bricks under all that white paint !

That's the block that I thought it was, the 2-storey block third down from Isabella - SH*T!!! So exactly which building are they referring to then? The first building is where Komrads was back in the 80's, don't know what ever went on in the second building south from there however there was a club in the 80's & 90's that was accessed from the laneway to the east, I think it was on the east side of the second floor of that 2-storey building that I thought was originally the 625 Yonge building. I can't remember what that club was called, but it was dumpy and simply a cash grab by whoever ran it.

I'm really pleased to see others understanding now what I have been bantering on about now for two years about losing the lowrise charactor of Yonge Street.

 

[supercilious]

Errrrrr.....uuummmmmm........yeah, is there going to be anything left of Yonge street, or is it to be wall to wall glass and steel in a few years, does city council have any comprehension of the word "no"???? So much for retaining ANY of TO's heritage and history! What a pisser! At first, at the beginning of the condo boom around 2005, I was so excited to see so much going up so fast, and I never thought I'd say it, but enough already! Leave Yonge alone, it's one of the last remaining hints of our culture, and it's about to be bulldozed over? I know saying this means nothing to a developer with bags of cash, but we've got to have limits. I've talked about this in previous threads, but it bears repeating, is it ethical, or socially responsible to allow our history to be erased in favour of some gaudy monstrosity that will fall apart in a few decades? I've been doing a little research, some of the original structures on Yonge, particularly between Dundas and Bloor, are almost 150 years old (a few even older). I know many of you are thinking "so what?", I guess I'm a freak, I have a silly sentimental attachment to my city's long and rich history, am I alone in thinking this?

While I agree that preserving history is important. There simply isn't much about this stretch of Yonge street that is very "rich" or "long" at all.

I'm sure that many people won't like to hear it, but there simply isn't a lot to to preserve in Toronto since the city is so new. Are we going to halt or move development from prime locations just because some ugly buildings were built merely 100 years ago?

We're forcing a history when one doesn't really exist.

 

[androiduk]

Right now there are about 10 vacant stores on Yonge between Charles & Wellesley. That's the most I think I've ever seen. The more the rest of the core gets cleaned up and developed, the worse Yonge street looks. Maybe it's time for some new blood. As a model of future Yonge development, 'Five' would be my first choice.

 

[nopacnone]

Agreed with superlicious. Nothing historical or characteristic about this brick box.

 

[innsertnamehere]

It may be only 100 years old but 100 years from now people will be wondering why we ripped down so much of what would then be 200 year old buildings. I am fine with Yonge being developed, but I maintain that most historic buildings should at least have their facade reapplied to the new structure. Lets people feel the history to a certain extent, as well as allowing the downtown to continue to grow.

 

[ThomasJ]

Yeah i think its both properties, which are both crappy.....http://goo.gl/maps/vWKDn even the older bldg.... they have destroyed the facade with the larger windows

...now this block just south and next door is worth keeping, ......http://goo.gl/maps/PwZJK big difference ehh.

incorrect - it is not both yonge street properties. the development site is 625 yonge (ie: the three-storey property on the corner at isabella) plus the adjacent rabba fine foods store to the east on isabella street which backs on to gloucester lane.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

The redeeming quality of that stretch of Yonge isn't the quality of the individual pieces of architecture per se (though there are some that clearly stand out) - but how they create a streetscape. That quality - dependent on the integrity of all the buildings taken as a whole - is far more sensitive to disruption by redevelopment at the different scale than building beside a one-off heritage building.

AoD

 

[someMidTowner]

incorrect - it is not both yonge street properties. the development site is 625 yonge (ie: the three-storey property on the corner at isabella) plus the adjacent rabba fine foods store to the east on isabella street which backs on to gloucester lane.

As I said in an earlier post, there is no 625 Yonge. There is 623 and 627, so it would appear you are talking about 627 Yonge.

 

[greenleaf]

The redeeming quality of that stretch of Yonge isn't the quality of the individual pieces of architecture per se (though there are some that clearly stand out) - but how they create a streetscape. That quality - dependent on the integrity of all the buildings taken as a whole - is far more sensitive to disruption by redevelopment at the different scale than building beside a one-off heritage building.

AoD

I wonder if the retail streetscape of Yonge could be considered protected in the new heritage official plan update via a "Cultural Heritage Landscape".

Defined as: "A cultural heritage landscape is a defined geographical area of heritage
significance which has been modified by human activities and is valued by a
community. It involves a grouping(s) of individual heritage features such as
structures, spaces, archaeological sites and natural elements, which together
form a significant type of heritage form, distinctive from that of its constituent
elements or parts. Examples may include, but are not limited to, heritage
conservation districts designated under the Ontario Heritage Act; and villages,
parks, gardens, battlefields, mainstreets and neighbourhoods, cemeteries,
trailways and industrial complexes of cultural heritage value."

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

As I said in an earlier post, there is no 625 Yonge. There is 623 and 627, so it would appear you are talking about 627 Yonge.

The Municipal addresses of 627 and 629 Yonge is the 2nd building south of Isabella St., the building at the corner lists their primary tenant as 637 Yonge St.

 

[Tony Spilotro]

I think you are correct on that

 

[RC8]

While I agree that preserving history is important. There simply isn't much about this stretch of Yonge street that is very "rich" or "long" at all.

I'm sure that many people won't like to hear it, but there simply isn't a lot to to preserve in Toronto since the city is so new. Are we going to halt or move development from prime locations just because some ugly buildings were built merely 100 years ago?

We're forcing a history when one doesn't really exist.

Welcome back to the forum. I think should look more deeply into this issue, though.

While Toronto can obviously not compete with European cities in terms of heritage, many examples of local architecture such as St. James' cathedral, Osgoode Hall, University College, St. Michael's cathedral, or St. Lawrence Hall are contemporary or pre-date many European buildings and landmarks (such as the Big Ben, for instance).

If losing a 100 year old building in Europe would be a shame, we should apply the same standards in Toronto - especially after we've destroyed so much already.

The Flatiron, the Royal York, the original Commerce Court, the Toronto Dominion Centre, the CN Tower, and the new Ritz Carlton are all pieces worth preserving regardless of their age.

The historic fabric of Yonge street defined what that space went on to become not just to Torontonians but to Canadians, and should be preserved with some integrity.