Jump to content
Jambands.ca

Massive fire on Queen St.West!!!!


The Chameleon

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 126
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

people who destroy video stores should be executed!

as a Canadian i don't really care too much about old city hall as i've never been inside, i've never lived in toronto, i have no connection to it. etc etc. that's why it should come down to city governments to enforce - bylaws with teeth. as far as i know criminal law is written federally, although i could be wrong.

sure it's nice to keep old architecture, but i don't think destroying it is worthy of a criminal charge. give the heritage act some teeth, fine the shit out of developers etc....

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW, another store that was lost in the fire was the great Suspect Video. There's not a finer video store in the city, including Bay Street Video.

Queen Video (3 locations on Queen+Bloor+College) are just as good in terms of quality+rare dvds! Sure they don't sell a "chucky" doll or "Nightmare on Elm St" lunch boxes, but Queen always gave Suspect a good run, when it came to selection+variety.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

BTW' date=' another store that was lost in the fire was the great Suspect Video. There's not a finer video store in the city, including Bay Street Video. [/quote']

Queen Video (3 locations on Queen+Bloor+College) are just as good in terms of quality+rare dvds! Sure they don't sell a "chucky" doll or "Nightmare on Elm St" lunch boxes, but Queen always gave Suspect a good run, when it came to selection+variety.

I love Queen Video too. I find there DVD's are in poor shape most of the time. Bay Street Video has the biggest selection and are almost as geeky as Suspect and moreso than Queen.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people who destroy video stores should be executed!

as a Canadian i don't really care too much about old city hall as i've never been inside, i've never lived in toronto, i have no connection to it. etc etc.

I really don't think it matters. I have no connection to Barrie, but a big part of their historic district was recently destoryed and it really bothered me. I know we as Canadians have identity issues. What happens when our past is continually paved over for condos?

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Hey Davey Boy, do you know anything about that OCA building and why it was built? Just curious. The architect in question is famous for designing controversial colourful buildings like that one. At least it generates debate and thought, whether you like it or not. The one new Toronto building I hate is this underwhelming box, Jack Diamond designed new opera house:

opera_house.jpg

Link to comment
Share on other sites

people get sweet skyline views?

all i'm saying is that it should be a local issue, not a giant federally mandated heritage provision in criminal law. things aren't the same in halifax as they are in winnipeg.

I don't think we have a visionary with that kind of power. Too bad, but I reluctantly agree with you for now.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Canada Has to (as a young country) Keep its Hertiage, and realise it is important, I hope that whole block is re-done right by Resto-masons like myself because Canada need to keep what it has, The company I work for restored Old City Hall and does most of the stuffin the GTA and surrounding area, Im glad they didnt tear it down, its a land mark, and I can understand AD that you dont live here but I mean there is alot of money goin in to the parliment buildings, What if they decided to change the parliment building to Glasss and steel? Ottawa wouldnt be the same with out that heritage. Dont get me wrong I apreciate new arichtechual design and engineering but keep what is heritage heritage, there is a reason why people travel far to see the pyrmids, the Domo, The Vatican, the colliseum, Notra Dam and many many more, magnificant buildings around the "oldWorld" Hopefully Toronto will try to keep what is truly Toronto Toronto. I knwo this was a long rant but a rant is rant and Rant on

Link to comment
Share on other sites

i didn't say tear the Old City Hall down, I was making the point that if it's a federal heritage law, how can the importance of the building be determined so that it can adequately be protected? It should be locally determined and governed - who knows better than the people that live beside the building, than the people who work in and around and on the building?

Your example of the Parliament Buildings isn't very good, as they do have national significance.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no no I wasnt saying you implyed that I was just saying myself that im glad the City of Toronto didnt decide to tear it done not you AD :P And as for the parliment example its the only thing I could thing of on the top of my head for heritage in Ottawa ( I dont live there), no offence intended in any of my verbal diarea, Ive just had too many after work beers and now am typing away :P

Edited by Guest
Link to comment
Share on other sites

no no no I wasnt saying you implyed that I was just saying myself that im glad the City of Toronto didnt decide to tear it done not you AD :P And as for the parliment example its the only thing I could thing of on the top of my head for heritage in Ottawa ( I dont live there), no offence intended in any of my verbal diarea, Ive just had too many after work beers and now am typing away :P

The only thing funnier than a cat fight is a hippie fight. Why don't you two knock each other over and tye-dye each other's clothes. ;)

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Your example of the Parliament Buildings isn't very good, as they do have national significance.

And I think the crux of the argument is that we don't have enough nationally significant buildings, so we have to save everything we can since they can become culturally and even nationally significant. Rediscovering both Old Quebec City and more recently Old Montreal has made Canada and especially Quebec stronger culturally and historically.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

I'd like to offer an example for comment. Duke's Cycle should rebuild to its former heritage-worthy state. Who should pay the additional cost to do so? Presumably, it would cost more to construct an historic looking stone building than a boring steel and concrete one (especially within a tight urban space). Is the Duke family "responsible" for that cost? Is their insurance company? The city / province / feds?

My point is that it's one thing to say what should happen, but a different thing to actually do it. And then there's the whole issue of what is historic enough to spend that premium saving. I dont think people want to tear down old buildings, I think they just see them as inefficient and in need of replacement.

In this case, I just dont think its worth spending a lot of money rebuilding something faux, back to its former glory, that is now gone.

Link to comment
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now



×
×
  • Create New...