Canadian Demolitions

[Rico Rommheim]

The former Hotel de la Montagne. We're not sure if it's a full demolition or an integration into the new tower (which will be the same height).





pics by Yvon L'Aîné

[RWin]

The Brookfield Place site in Calgary starting from last August.


August 29, 2012


March 19, 2013


April 2, 2013


August 29, 2013

[Drybrain]

A lot of Calgary forumers may have seen this already, but that Calgary one is a bit of a shame because...





You've got to wonder how much was still intact underneath all that marble or whatever.

[shreddog]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

A lot of Calgary forumers may have seen this already, but that Calgary one is a bit of a shame because...

You've got to wonder how much was still intact underneath all that marble or whatever.

There are pictures out there taken during the demo that showed that when the building was refaced, the original facing was totally removed (including the gargoyles) and that there was nothing of historical interest left from the old building.

[flar]

The developer who recently bought this church is saying it needs to come down before winter

[Martin Mtl]

They didn't really bought a church. They bought a land.

[Drybrain]

They're actually keeping the front of the church that faces onto James, and affixing it to a tower that will rise from behind. Better than a full demolition, but still--it'll probably look pretty ridiculous.

It's amazing that developers even buy buildings with the intent to demolish in Hamilton. There are a zillion parking lots all over the downtown, that must be cheaper to purchase.

[lio45]

A few days ago on CBC I caught a program on Hamilton and the ongoing destruction there... I was driving, and didn't listen to all of it, but the urbanist guy who was interviewed (he wrote a book on it IIRC) called it "self-mutilation", a trend in some post-industrial towns, and he cited Brantford as an example, explaining how they insisted on going forward with the idea of razing a large chunk of the downtown squarely against the advice from nearly all outsiders.

It's hard to understand that mindset when you're from outside, I suppose. (If I ran the municipal Demolition Committee you couldn't touch that church as long as there are available vacant lots in the area.)

[kwoldtimer]

Originally Posted by flar

The developer who recently bought this church is saying it needs to come down before winter

Planning to save the atrium and the steeple, no? Still a shame. I hope the City can oblige the developer to produce a tower that compliments that façade.

[flar]

The thing is, in Hamilton everyone promises a tower. But just look at the skyline.

[Innsertnamehere]

That's what most concerns me in Hamilton. demolish first, think of development later. oops development didn't work out (Surprise!) now I have a very profitable parking lot. too bad.

Toronto doesn't allow new parking lots downtown for longer than a period of 2 years. after that, they either develop it or let it become a grass lot. (there of course is a grandfathering clause which allows existing parking lots to continue to operate) Additionally, a comprehensive rezoning has to have been submitted first to show intent to build, not just a simple massing model.

addtionally, a building like that would not be allowed to be torn down until construction actually starts, and at least a portion of it would have to be maintained.

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Toronto doesn't allow new parking lots downtown for longer than a period of 2 years. after that, they either develop it or let it become a grass lot. (there of course is a grandfathering clause which allows existing parking lots to continue to operate) Additionally, a comprehensive rezoning has to have been submitted first to show intent to build, not just a simple massing model.

addtionally, a building like that would not be allowed to be torn down until construction actually starts, and at least a portion of it would have to be maintained.

Supposedly there is a bylaw that prevents "new" parking lots. I don't know the details, but Hamilton city council finally got around to that one in the recent past.

But to the second point of yours I quoted, this is still an issue.

Re: the church, I question why the owner - who is a fairly recent buyer - didn't do more study of the building before buying it. You'd think such a major issue or at least any doubts about structural stability would have been uncovered by even a high-level engineering assessment, and such an assessment would be warranted before investing money into an old church.

And can't it be temporarily braced until some kind of firm plan is developed?

If not, in whatever they build can't they make good use of all that stone that would come down? Plus the interior features that may be worth saving??

[ScreamingViking]

Originally Posted by Drybrain

It's amazing that developers even buy buildings with the intent to demolish in Hamilton. There are a zillion parking lots all over the downtown, that must be cheaper to purchase.

I've read others note that the owners of those lots expect a lot (mind the pun) to part with them. I can believe that.

Now that things are slowly starting to turn around, the expectations are probably rising at a relative exponential rate.

[kool maudit]

i don't know what was on ottawa streets like laurier, slater, and albert before about 1970, but whatever it was, it's all gone.

if there was at least one counterpart to sparks — even a lower, three-to-four-storey one — a few blocks south, the downtown would hold together a lot better. but there's not. and unless you are in the market for a teddy bar wearing a mountie hat, or just like buildings that probably once frames a bustling and important thoroughfare but now don't, sparks is pretty depressing.

[Airboy]

Demolition of Edmontons Central Post Office to make way for the New Royal Alberta Museum.

The original Art work that was part of this structure was removed with the help of the Artist. will be cleaned and restored on site after construction is complete.

[DizzyEdge]

Originally Posted by shreddog

There are pictures out there taken during the demo that showed that when the building was refaced, the original facing was totally removed (including the gargoyles) and that there was nothing of historical interest left from the old building.

I can confirm this, all of the original historic elements were apparently removed in the 60s when the marble reskinning took place.

[niwell]

Originally Posted by kool maudit

i don't know what was on ottawa streets like laurier, slater, and albert before about 1970, but whatever it was, it's all gone.

if there was at least one counterpart to sparks — even a lower, three-to-four-storey one — a few blocks south, the downtown would hold together a lot better. but there's not. and unless you are in the market for a teddy bar wearing a mountie hat, or just like buildings that probably once frames a bustling and important thoroughfare but now don't, sparks is pretty depressing.

Sparks is a perfect example of the wrong way to do a pedestrian street. It is depressing. I think it would actually be a good idea to open it up to limited traffic and have better demarcated sidewalks. It's just too sparse as it is, and the central patio areas aren't doing much good.

Back in the day it seems like Sparks was Ottawa's main street in Centretown. Almost all the streetcar lines ran down it.

[Rico Rommheim]

Hotel de la Montagne. Tallest Canadian building currently under demolition?



by Bilomtl on mtlurb



by WestAust

[MolsonExport]

^sank more than a few beverages at the rooftop bar. even swam in the rooftop pool once. I am not sorry to see that fugly building go.

[Rico Rommheim]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

^sank more than a few beverages at the rooftop bar. even swam in the rooftop pool once. I am not sorry to see that fugly building go.

I had many a drink on that rooftop patio. There was nothing like it in town.


I stayed with my girlfriend a couple nights. The interior was beautiful and newly renovated. The staff was very professional. I think the hotel could have been renovated and fitted with a new cladding.


They're demolishing it and replacing it with a tower that will be exactly the same height. So we're not gaining anything out of this. We're just losing downtown Montreal's coolest rooftop patio.

The hotel rooms tourist brochures included one that had the SSP Montreal diagrams. It was also the site of my first SSP "smoked meet" where I enjoyed pints with the likes of Serge Lacasse, harls, Habsfan and the others. I have very fond memories of this place. I really just think they should have renovated its exterior, and left the damn hotel alone.