Q Condos (20 Queen St N) | 34 fl | Proposed

[Bjays93]

Beautiful.  My guess is that saving it definitely means no 34 story building though.

I sort of agree with that. To add, trying to force them to preserve the interior may be an overreach and could set a bad precedent. By that, I mean, heritage advocates could make it hard for anyone to make interior changes. Years ago I rented an apartment that for sure had interior heritage (arched hallway openings, unique wall finish, etc) that I am sure many would want left alone. Not saying that the interior should have been changed, but bad tenants sometimes ruin the interior that make major renovations necessary.

That said, they might be able to mimic the interior so that it duplicates what used to be there.

No offence but restoration is definitely the proper route in a case like that. We have a 150 year old house and have needed to do major renos, but have made sure to keep things like the original plaster, crown molding etc. 

As for setting the precedent of having to preserve heritage buildings. Honestly not one I'm too against. Theres still plenty of parking lots that could be redeveloped downtown that I'd rather see gone before a heritage building has to go. 

I understand saving the whole interior might not be possible, but finding a way to save as much as they can should be the objective.

[TMKM94]

I wonder if Momentum could buy 30 Queen St./7 Duke St. And build the condo building there and make 20 Queen something similar to Glovebox.

[tomh009]

I sort of agree with that. To add, trying to force them to preserve the interior may be an overreach and could set a bad precedent. By that, I mean, heritage advocates could make it hard for anyone to make interior changes. Years ago I rented an apartment that for sure had interior heritage (arched hallway openings, unique wall finish, etc) that I am sure many would want left alone. Not saying that the interior should have been changed, but bad tenants sometimes ruin the interior that make major renovations necessary.

That said, they might be able to mimic the interior so that it duplicates what used to be there.

No offence but restoration is definitely the proper route in a case like that. We have a 150 year old house and have needed to do major renos, but have made sure to keep things like the original plaster, crown molding etc. 

As for setting the precedent of having to preserve heritage buildings. Honestly not one I'm too against. Theres still plenty of parking lots that could be redeveloped downtown that I'd rather see gone before a heritage building has to go. 

If the heritage restrictions were extended to interiors, every homeowner in a heritage district would need to get approval before making interior changes -- no kitchen or bathroom reno without heritage committee approval, for example. You would not have had full control over your reno decisions, either. I do expect that would make a whole lot of people unhappy.

In any case, I don't think this building is a heritage-listed property, or is it?

[dtkvictim]

What makes it easier or more desirable for a developer to redevelop a property like this, instead of one of the many unquestionably shit buildings or empty lots we have? Surely they would be cheaper to purchase, and cheaper to develop by way of less friction, no?

[jeffster]

What makes it easier or more desirable for a developer to redevelop a property like this, instead of one of the many unquestionably shit buildings or empty lots we have? Surely they would be cheaper to purchase, and cheaper to develop by way of less friction, no?

Likely in this case, the exterior was a desired feature.

[tomh009]

What makes it easier or more desirable for a developer to redevelop a property like this, instead of one of the many unquestionably shit buildings or empty lots we have? Surely they would be cheaper to purchase, and cheaper to develop by way of less friction, no?

Also depends on what is available to purchase, and at what price. The owners of the various properties may not always agree with us here on whether their buildings should be torn down and redeveloped. Or they may want to do the redevelopment themselves rather than selling the property.

[Lebronj23]

Today

[IronDev]

This project was just brought in front of the Heritage Committee.

Momentum wanted to keep the facade, portions of the side, and move important elements of the interior into the community benefit space. Momentum also stated that over 20% of their units will meet the Regions affordability criteria

The committee members, from the comfort of their million dollar detached homes, did nothing but bring up not liking the height and density. No alternatives or advice was provided. They voted to designate the building, with one of their main arguments being that they want more power and say over the development. This is an unelected committee.

I would rather see a community benefit space brining attention to key heritage aspects, than a building sit and rot to please 8 citizens

[ac3r]

The committee members, from the comfort of their million dollar detached homes, did nothing but bring up not liking the height and density. No alternatives or advice was provided. They voted to designate the building, with one of their main arguments being that they want more power and say over the development. This is an unelected committee.

Lol, don't worry, neither the developers nor city take any of this shit into consideration. They're obligated to let rich white NIMBY voters vent, but aren't gonna cancel a project of this scale because some grandma thinks it's too tall. I can almost guarantee this project will be approved despite their crying. Hopefully they can save as much as the original building as they can, but ultimately it's engineering issues that will prevent them from saving the entire thing. So it really boils down to: dozens upon dozens of more housing units (which we desperately need), or nothing at all just to preserve a dance studio and whatever else rents the place...

[tomh009]

This project was just brought in front of the Heritage Committee.

Momentum wanted to keep the facade, portions of the side, and move important elements of the interior into the community benefit space. Momentum also stated that over 20% of their units will meet the Regions affordability criteria

The committee members, from the comfort of their million dollar detached homes, did nothing but bring up not liking the height and density. No alternatives or advice was provided. They voted to designate the building, with one of their main arguments being that they want more power and say over the development. This is an unelected committee.

And they never thought the building was worth protecting until there was a development proposal for it ...

[nms]

Seen from above, the current building has an H-shaped footprint and is appears to be the result of one if not two additions. Beyond the portion that immediately fronts Queen St, I wonder how much of the rear portion has the fine woodworking interior.

I also wonder what condo owners in the building will do once the Duke St parking garage reaches capacity. Will it be a cat-and-mouse game of parking in a non-8 Queen designated spot and hoping that you're not ticketed? Will the Museum be able to handle the drop in car traffic from visitors?

[jeffster]

This project was just brought in front of the Heritage Committee.

Momentum wanted to keep the facade, portions of the side, and move important elements of the interior into the community benefit space. Momentum also stated that over 20% of their units will meet the Regions affordability criteria

The committee members, from the comfort of their million dollar detached homes, did nothing but bring up not liking the height and density. No alternatives or advice was provided. They voted to designate the building, with one of their main arguments being that they want more power and say over the development. This is an unelected committee.

And they never thought the building was worth protecting until there was a development proposal for it ...

Right....and when it is, it can't come out of their pockets.

Looks like the developer is doing everything right though. So hopefully there won't be any snags.

[tomh009]

I also wonder what condo owners in the building will do once the Duke St parking garage reaches capacity. Will it be a cat-and-mouse game of parking in a non-8 Queen designated spot and hoping that you're not ticketed? Will the Museum be able to handle the drop in car traffic from visitors?

The city has a plan to build an additional parking garage once the current garages start approach capacity.

[jeffster]

I also wonder what condo owners in the building will do once the Duke St parking garage reaches capacity. Will it be a cat-and-mouse game of parking in a non-8 Queen designated spot and hoping that you're not ticketed? Will the Museum be able to handle the drop in car traffic from visitors?

An ideal problem for the city. There is also Hotel Benton that's literally just up the street that they could park at, and sits mostly empty, especially at night. For the energetic condo owners, who still drive cars, they can also park at the Cop Shop®. Not that I would ever buy a condo, but really, Hotel Benton is close enough that I can't imagine too many complaining about the walk. I'd also wonder if Market Square would be a feasible option (though not city owned).

[Lebronj23]

I’m wondering what the fuss with interior preservation is all about. A lot of Toronto heritage preservations are stripped down to the bones except for one or two exterior walls. This gets approval without question. Never the less, I hope this isn’t an issue here