Toronto Residences at the RCMI Condos | 134.72m | 42s | Tribute | Zeidler

grey said:
Does any of that amazing detail still exist beneath the stucco for a future, more sensible generation to uncover?
Click to expand...

Take a look at the pix below and it looks like most of the detail should be intact and the stucco fairly easy to remove. In fact, maybe the stucco helped preserve the original facade.

f1231_it0080.jpg



4261.jpg


4263.jpg


4264.jpg


4265.jpg
 
Last edited by a moderator:
i really hate stucco coverups...completely distasteful. there are quite a few victims in this city to say the least.

well, it seems like this building is pretty well gone and we're going to be left some more facadism. c'est la vie i suppose. still, very sad.
 
In fact, maybe the stucco helped preserve the original facade.
Click to expand...

stucco destroys (or most specifically the nailed on diamond lathe and corners)
 
Though this is definitely stucco/plaster of the pre-EIFS era, so it actually might be *less* destructive, in raw terms. Still, when it comes to the bowed bay, the act of balcony enclosure and window replacement did enough "destruction" in its own right that didn't require stucco. And one must, too, allow for the fact that it was likely done back when the original Edwardian style was deemed unfashionable--50s/60s, perhaps?

I'd be just as interested in knowing how much original detail exists behind the present boxed-in metal entablature and cornice...
 
When does the city make a decision on this building?

I think it should be made rental, given the current market situation... maybe?
 
Some news on this project

The original brick behind the stucco is in bad condition and a lot of the original detailing is gone. The building is going to be restored, as best as it can be, to the original state. It will be brick, and the balcony will reappear. From the renderings I have seen, the RCMI is going to pretty much look like those old pictures once again.

The architectural drawings were just resubmitted to the city last week and a decision should come in the next few months.

As for the parking problem... there are many parking lots around the site that offer monthly parking. If someone were to purchase a unit in a building with no parking, im assuming the lots would be glad to lease out spaces to them. Since every unit is a 1 bedroom or bachelor and most condos dont offer parking to people who purchase 1 bedrooms (unless there is space), I dont see the parking issue being a problem.
 
It looks like city council is going to kill this one off at their next meeting (no parking, no amenity space). If the developers want to go ahead they'll have to go to the OMB.
 
androiduk said:
It looks like city council is going to kill this one off at their next meeting (no parking, no amenity space). If the developers want to go ahead they'll have to go to the OMB.
Click to expand...

There is some amenity space in the revised submission. The only thing the city is against now is the parking issue. Some at city hall are all for the project, some are completely against.
 
androiduk said:
It looks like city council is going to kill this one off at their next meeting (no parking, no amenity space). If the developers want to go ahead they'll have to go to the OMB.
Click to expand...

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2009/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-21943.pdf

Planning staff issued this refusal report, but I don't think that means council will kill it. There was a refusal report on TAS and council still approved it since councilor Vaughan was on side. Provided he's onside with this proposal we could well see this one approved at council's next meeting.
 
I will go on a leap here and state that I hope the current proposal with no parking get refused by City Council and the OMB ... don't get me wrong, I think 42s is a great thing ... but as much as we recognize that this project is in the smack middle of the City with great subway access is no ground for it to have NO on site parking ... I believe a reduced parking ratio should be allowed, but that does not equate to zero parking

my 2 cents ~
 
Why do so few believe this will fly? What is council's hesitancy here? Are there any precedent condos with no parking anywhere in Toronto?
 
I just readed a bit more into the staff report ... this proposal is totally conceptual and unrealistic by requesting:
  • 38.06 FSI
  • 82% site coverage
  • 105 bachelors / 210 one-bedroom units (315 in total)
  • 9 parkings spaces
seems like the land owner is just trying to maximize the land value 'potential' before selling it off ~

BTW ... project architecture designed by Zeidler Partnership Architects
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top