Toronto The Britt Condos | 142.03m | 41s | Lanterra | Arcadis

Toronto Star today

Sutton Place Hotel tenants fight against leaving their homes
May 29, 2012

Susan Pigg

Lanterra Developments plans to close its deal to buy the Sutton Place Hotel June 18 and convert it to condos, but has vowed to create a “rental wing†for some 20 tenants — one of them 102-years-old — who have called the hotel home for decades.

“We are planning to respect their rights and we intend to respect their tenure,†said Lanterra president and CEO Barry Fenton. “We appreciate that some of the tenants are nervous about that, but we intend to comply with our obligations.â€

The tenants have been trying to stop the deal since it was first announced in February but will find themselves in a virtual no man’s land as of June 15 when the hotel officially closes and staff are laid off.

The tenants are refusing to move, despite the fact the hotel restaurant and other services will be shut down and they will be largely alone in the empty shell of Toronto’s former palace to Hollywood stars.

“We are taking a lot of pains to ensure their security and their tenure after the hotel closes its operations,†said Fenton, refusing to elaborate. “We’re not responsible for the fact that the hotel had to close. I think the tenants need to appreciate that the hotel was no longer a viable option.â€

While plans are a long way from being finalized — and still face considerable opposition from the tenants, one a savvy former Cadillac-Fairview developer — Lanterra plans to add about nine floors to the 33-storey hotel, convert its 375 hotel rooms into up to 600 condo units and add restaurants and retail space to the base of the landmark at Bay and Wellesley Sts.

But first Lanterra has to meet conditions of both a Toronto bylaw that prevents the conversion of rentals to condos and the Landlord and Tenant Act.

Lanterra intends to give the tenants three months notice, as required by law, and has told tenants they will be moved into nearby Lanterra condo projects for up to three years while the hotel is gutted and revamped.

“Lanterra’s attitude seems to be that this is our building and we can put you out anytime we want,†says tenant Jerry Shefsky, 80, a former top executive with Cadillac-Fairview who’s had a penthouse suite in the hotel for 29 years.

Shefsky is especially concerned about fellow tenant Sydney Bacon who just turned 102 and has lived in the hotel 40 years. “He’s not going to be moved out and come back three years later,†says Shefsky.

“We are planning to add a rental wing to the (new condo) building,†says Fenton. “We will provide them with an offer of comparable units at the same rate they’ve been paying.â€

Fenton wouldn’t say when Lanterra hopes to start moving out the tenants or start gutting the old Sutton Place Hotel.

But he stressed that none of the issues around the tenants has come as a surprise and that it they haven’t affected the sale price, which is rumoured to be between $65 million and $80 million, but won’t be disclosed until the sale is finalized.

“There are (condo development) sites that we have acquired that have a lot more complexities than this one. We’re veterans in the business and in life, you know, the more the challenge, the better the site in the end.

“W’re very, very confident in the process. We’re fair developers, we’re understanding developers.â€
 
Community Consultation Meeting Tonight!!! 7PM

Community Consultation Meeting is today - May 29th at 7PM at St. Basil's Church, Parish Hall, 50 St. Joseph Street.
 
SP!RE said:
Greed / contempt for fellow human beings and history. Yay capitalism.
Click to expand...

... but what might you consider a superior arrangement to fairly address the needs of the remaining few tenants?

Not trying to defend Lanterra or anything, but this was a legitimate business transaction. Lanterra can't exactly keep these folks onsite in their existing accommodations during the redevelopment. They have provided them with (what I understand to be) notice of their intentions, compensation packages, and IMO an extremely generous offer to return to a comparable unit in the building at the same cost, following construction.

Not trying to sound like an ass or anything but how far does Lanterra have to go to satisfy these residents (even if one is 102) ?
 
I only attended the first half, but the meeting had already devolved into complaints about everything but the design or what changes would need to be made to improve the application from the community's perspective. There were lots of engineering questions for adding additional storeys onto the existing building (concerns that the tower would sink into Taddle creek which runs underneath; Apparently it took the original developer 8 years to build this because the foundation had so many water issues). There were several issues raised about loss of rental housing which is a legitimate concern.

The podium actually didn't look that bad in the renders, but it didn't necessarily act harmoniously with the tower. The east side of the podium was not very kind to its neighbours in that it appears to be ramming itself towards 24 Wellesley. It appears some thought was put into how the new podium would act at street level.

The tower, which they propose to remove the current concrete that gives the building its distinct look, looks like a horrendous botch job. The building loses all its early 60s soul. Replacing the windows would be fine, but why mess with something that already works?
 
greenleaf said:
The tower, which they propose to remove the current concrete that gives the building its distinct look, looks like a horrendous botch job. The building loses all its early 60s soul. Replacing the windows would be fine, but why mess with something that already works?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. :( The only thing i would change about the Sutton Place would be the podium.
 
I was at the meeting last night too. It was hard to tell from the rendering sketches, but I agree it seemed to be an unattractive mismatch of styles. Sutton Place is landmark and icon of design of its time, it deserves better than this. I also found the structural concerns raised to be quite interesting.

Other comments concerned traffice conjestion on Phipps and shadowing on the new park proposed as part of the U Condo development.
 
marsh said:
Other comments concerned traffice conjestion on Phipps and shadowing on the new park proposed as part of the U Condo development.
Click to expand...

I thought the decision to move the garage entrance to Phipps was a great idea. There is so much conflict right now with the current entrace on Bay with pedestrians. Surprised people would use that as their go to point. I think there are a lot of NIMBY's on this one.
 
There should be a better term than NIMBY for this project. It's not about buildings in backyards, but about building over the entire house.
 
I was also at the meeting last night, along with another UrbanToronto member. We walked over to the site after the meeting to resolve a couple of questions we had about it all, but it was too dark by then to take any photographs. (I plan to go back in a few days to take some, but of course if anyone beats me to it, please go ahead!)

One 24 Wellesley resident who spoke at the meeting, and whose unit is in the podium right along the property line, was wondering how the changes to the Sutton Place podium would affect her. Assuming she faces north over the 24 Wellesley driveway area, she and other 24 Wellesley residents in the lower floors who face that space currently look at the Sutton's three storey blank brick wall. It will be reduced to one storey where the Sutton Place's new amenity terrace is planned, opening up their views to a landscaped space between the Sutton's new podium wings, instead of the cramped concrete courtyard they look at now. Seems like a favourable impact to me.

The move of the Sutton Place underground parking access from Bay beside Phipps to the northeast corner off of Phipps, and the subsequent widening of Phipps to 8.5 metres will improve traffic flow down there no doubt, including for residents at 1001 Bay whose driveway is accessed off that street. Having the deliveries to the Sutton Place internalized within its base is another good idea. Phipps will also get a wide sidewalk, trees, and retail… meaning it will finally feel like a street and not an alley. That seems like a win to me.

The Bay sidewalk (and this was not well explained at the meeting) looks to me like it would be improved too, no longer having to deal with cars drop offs, etc. The sidewalk itself will be a bit wider, plus will have a line of trees planted, while a new podium will extend over most of the existing car drop-off zone.

Shadowing of the park at Bay and St. Joseph would be brief in spring and fall, non-existant in summer, if they get the height increase they are asking for.

So, for those types of changes to the building, I am fine. I'm not sold, however, on the de-60s-ification of the exterior. I'd prefer to see the building's current aesthetic retained, cleaned, repaired, etc., and then enhanced by stylistically harmonious additions. That's not the direction they are going in now, but I know that Sol Wassermuhl can craft something more sympathetic to the existing vernacular if that is what he is asked to do. (That said, I agree with Greenleaf that the podium looked better than I expected - but I'd prefer that on a new building, not on one stripped of its former character.)

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top