digi
Active Member
Why can't you answer?
Toronto Nicholas Residences | ?m | 35s | Urban Capital | Core Architects
- Thread starter jaborandi
- Start date
Why can't you answer?
androiduk
Senior Member
With all due respect marsh, the 'mill' has been altered so much that there is no way anybody could tell what it was in a previous life. Ditto for the street and the intersection of St. Mary & St. Nicholas. I live in the area and have stated in a previous post that it would be nice if the developer could keep the current buildings but I wouldn't oppose the development. I like the cottages but I wouldn't consider them outstanding. I think there's about 10 of them but I believe 4 of them are now commercial and have lost there charm due to alterations. The small houses across the street make an attempt to fit in but I don't find them particularly attractive. I use this street every day because I pick up my kids at St. Mary & St. Nicholas from the school bus. We always walk home via St. Nicholas because there is very little vehicular & pedestrian traffic. I can't see this changing much because of the addition of 1 highrise. Don't forget the other 3 corners of this intersection have highrises & it's still charming. If anything, the cottages might become more charming because of the contrast of the condo.
AnnH
New Member
St. Nicholas
There is a good article in today's Post.
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=927469
Check it out.
There is a good article in today's Post.
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=927469
Check it out.
casaguy
Senior Member
A silver lining of the credit crisis for the opponents.
whatever
Senior Member
Who, me? Terribly sorry, I tend to get up every few hours or so.
I'm not an insider, and have no vested interest. I just don't think a tower here is the end of the world, so long as it's a good tower.
And as was already pointed out, existing zoning means very little. If you paid attention to how development works in the city you'd know that the zoning is amended for almost everything that gets built in the downtown area.
And the reason you should be trying to work with the developer is that the odds are in favour of them on this one. The site is smack downtown in an area ripe for intensification. Even if the city rules against it I'd bet the OMB would let it go ahead. So, strategically, instead of fighting a losing battle why not hold your nose and try to get the best building you can get? The only possible thing that will cause this proposal to go away will be the economy, and that will only delay the inevitable (and quite possibly you'll be looking at a larger tower down the road, if the developer manages to acquire more land)
marsh
Active Member
First:
"I use this street every day because I pick up my kids at St. Mary & St. Nicholas from the school bus. We always walk home via St. Nicholas because there is very little vehicular & pedestrian traffic. I can't see this changing much because of the addition of 1 highrise"
There is parking for over 200 cars with this condo. The developer estimated approximately 500 to 600 people would be living in the condo. You don't think this type of development won't change the pedestrian and traffic flow on St Nicholas? You might was well walk your kids home on Bay or Yonge Street if the development goes through.
Second:
With respect to the argument that we might as well work with the developer because the project is going to get approved in any event, I personally think that it is a sad commentary on the state of urban development in Toronto.
We recognize that St. Nicholas St is in the centre of a highly intensified area, but that is all the more reason to preserve the steet - to provide breathing space to the surrounding areas. Somewhere on this blog someone suggested that we should work with the developer and maybe we could get a community centre or a park (or more likely a "parkette") thrown in. Well we don't need a community centre or park - people use St. Nicholas like a de facto park.
And I'll reiterate, we are willing to work with the developer on a development that respects the history and character of the street but a 44 storey condo tower that results in the needless destruction of a beautiful old building does not achieve this goal.
"I use this street every day because I pick up my kids at St. Mary & St. Nicholas from the school bus. We always walk home via St. Nicholas because there is very little vehicular & pedestrian traffic. I can't see this changing much because of the addition of 1 highrise"
There is parking for over 200 cars with this condo. The developer estimated approximately 500 to 600 people would be living in the condo. You don't think this type of development won't change the pedestrian and traffic flow on St Nicholas? You might was well walk your kids home on Bay or Yonge Street if the development goes through.
Second:
With respect to the argument that we might as well work with the developer because the project is going to get approved in any event, I personally think that it is a sad commentary on the state of urban development in Toronto.
We recognize that St. Nicholas St is in the centre of a highly intensified area, but that is all the more reason to preserve the steet - to provide breathing space to the surrounding areas. Somewhere on this blog someone suggested that we should work with the developer and maybe we could get a community centre or a park (or more likely a "parkette") thrown in. Well we don't need a community centre or park - people use St. Nicholas like a de facto park.
And I'll reiterate, we are willing to work with the developer on a development that respects the history and character of the street but a 44 storey condo tower that results in the needless destruction of a beautiful old building does not achieve this goal.
adma
Superstar
Somehow, I feel that any folks who'd brush away the cottages as "un-outstanding" pretty much shoots themselves in the foot when it comes to a heritage-sensitive response to the so-called NIMBYs...
DarnDirtyApe
Active Member
I find arguing with these guys about heritage preservation to be a bit pointless. Pretty much any reason will do as justification to knock something down and build a big tower...
androiduk
Senior Member
Normally, I'd agree with you adma but have you seen what the owners have done to them. Between the commercial alterations, the inappropriate fencing and lack of landscaping, a lot of these places have really deteriorated aesthetically. If the people who own these cottages want them protected and respected, they have to start with themselves.
AnnH
New Member
I beg to differ
I think the row houses are charming. The iron fences have been added slowly over the years and owners have custom made the window boxes to match one another. The gables have been repaired with custom mill work.
The gardens are small but they are tended to. The owner of 55 St. Nicholas Street has a mature peonie tree in her front yard that gets so much attention by pedestrians that she puts up a sign to label the tree each spring.
This row of 10 houses has been featured in many books on Historic Toronto Houses.
I think the row houses are charming. The iron fences have been added slowly over the years and owners have custom made the window boxes to match one another. The gables have been repaired with custom mill work.
The gardens are small but they are tended to. The owner of 55 St. Nicholas Street has a mature peonie tree in her front yard that gets so much attention by pedestrians that she puts up a sign to label the tree each spring.
This row of 10 houses has been featured in many books on Historic Toronto Houses.
casaguy
Senior Member
^This is a very poor argument. 500-600 extra people won't exactly create mad chaos on St. Nicholas St.
It's as if you think they are all going to be going about their lives en masse all at the exact same time in the exact same spot.
Take for example Radio City Condos at Jarvis and Carlton. On the west side of the two towers of some 30 floors each lies a quaint little street next to a school. I can't think of any time I've ever seen more than 6 people and 2 cars moving about all at the same time on Mutual Street nor do I recall hearing about any earth shattering tragedies on Mutual Street as a result of this intensification. The only issue I've encountered is trying to find parking right next to the building. Hardly a big deal.
I appreciate your resistance to change and the fact that you want to protect this calm residential oasis a block away from Yonge and Bloor but I fail to see how adding more people to the immediate neighbourhood will put you or your child in harm's way.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
That's an excellent comparison casaguy. Further, the Radio City/NBS only served to enhance Mutual street and to a great extent, move out some undesirable behavior that used to take place along there at night.
I love walking down St. Nicholas Street with my dog then continuing through the alleyway to the Rabba store on Wellesley Street. There's no doubt that this street is a wonderful walking route between Yonge & Bay but I don't buy the argument that a high rise will change this area as dramatically as some propose.
I love walking down St. Nicholas Street with my dog then continuing through the alleyway to the Rabba store on Wellesley Street. There's no doubt that this street is a wonderful walking route between Yonge & Bay but I don't buy the argument that a high rise will change this area as dramatically as some propose.
Last edited:
marsh
Active Member
St Nicholas
I also reject the argument that the Victorian row houses are poorly cared for. I know extensive repairs were made on them earlier this year (I saw the scaffolding and the workmen). The owners do take a lot of pride in their homes.
With respect to the addition 500 to 600 people, that is a lot of people on a little site on a little street. I will think it will change the character of the street and I only mentioned it because people on this site say they enjoying strolling along St Nicholas street. So I have to ask why do you enjoy walking on St. Nicholas Street? Why not Bay or Yonge?
I also reject the argument that the Victorian row houses are poorly cared for. I know extensive repairs were made on them earlier this year (I saw the scaffolding and the workmen). The owners do take a lot of pride in their homes.
With respect to the addition 500 to 600 people, that is a lot of people on a little site on a little street. I will think it will change the character of the street and I only mentioned it because people on this site say they enjoying strolling along St Nicholas street. So I have to ask why do you enjoy walking on St. Nicholas Street? Why not Bay or Yonge?
adma
Superstar
So, are you suggesting they'd only be valuable if they were pristine and absolutely unaltered and, perhaps, still residential as when they were built?
Beg to differ.
androiduk
Senior Member
I wouldn't go that far but I do definitely believe that when someone buys a historical property they have a moral obligation to take care of it. I guess I see them more as custodians than owners, much the same as someone who owns a famous work of art. Maybe I'm influenced by what's happening on my own street a few blocks away. I live across from a row of Victorian semis. In the past year, 2 of them were purchased by new owners who subsequently poured in over $200,00 each in restorations. Two doors east of where I live is a large Victorian Mansion. Workmen have spent the last 2 weeks burning off the old paint down to the bare wood and refinishing the wood in historical colours. Now maybe the people on St. Nicholas don't have a lot of resources but they have lived there for a long time because these cottages very rarely come up for sale. The only cottage where I see the type of commitment necessary to maintain it is in #53, which I've pictured below. There are also pix of the mill (I hope this is the right building), the street and the intersection of St. Mary & St. Nicholas.
