thecharioteer said:
How about if we call it a "piazza"?
Click to expand...

Uhhh, when I think Piazza.............I think Piazza Navona ....

1649176140482.png


I don't think such a small space deserves a grand name
 
For reasons beyond my understanding ..... @ProjectEnd will have to explain, this one is being dusted off for SPA:

www.toronto.ca

Application Details

www.toronto.ca www.toronto.ca

@Paclo

1752684322200.png


@40 % below to see the whole thing.

1752684377059.png


Same render as above, at 100% with the top cropped off:

1752684476066.png


1752684986510.png


1752684562378.png


1752684668442.png

1752684698279.png


1752685050942.png

1752685098925.png


Comments:

Still no connection to College Station despite the obvious benefits for all involved.

Retained office is a surprise, why not swap for affordable housing?

Six levels of underground parking adds needless costs.

No indication of tenure change here.

Elevator ratio is inadequate.

Larger rental units would solve the elevator problem. Affordable rental would be a good trade to chop the office space and pare the parking down to 2 levels.
 
Last edited:
162 spaces in 6 levels is surprisingly inefficient for a property this size. It's not actually that much parking for a project this scale.

This one is definitely confusing. What are they chasing here? 90,000sf of office in a bad market area and demolition of a significant structure for.. what? There are far cheaper sites around in terms of land costs than this, surely?

2-level retail in 2025 is nice to see though.

I too dislike the increasing return of Po-Mo styles in modern architecture. Not my thing.
 
innsertnamehere said:
162 spaces in 6 levels is surprisingly inefficient for a property this size. It's not actually that much parking for a project this scale.

This one is definitely confusing. What are they chasing here? 90,000sf of office in a bad market area and demolition of a significant structure for.. what? There are far cheaper sites around in terms of land costs than this, surely?
Click to expand...

All good questions. We await PE's wisdom

innsertnamehere said:
2-level retail in 2025 is nice to see though.

I too dislike the increasing return of Po-Mo styles in modern architecture. Not my thing.
Click to expand...

I don't mind good PoMo......

This is not that.
 
I don't mind the parkette idea. However I like the corner as is with the 60's (I think) edifice. I get that some do not admire the existing. This proposal just doest seem interesting enough fo this important corner. I've always liked the urbanity of this of all Yonge street corners. Get the paper 'Toronto Star paper!' Anybody remember that man?
 
Last edited:
The existant structure is a very good example of a Modernist, place making office tower, and to see it torn down for a forgettable investment apartment tower with a janky, un-urban, mish mashed design is outright insulting.
I don't see the point in redeveloping this as others have noted. At that rate, you may as well consider the Hydro building (which, also shouldnt be touched), or the row housing to the SE, behind Yonge, near TMU.
 
TossYourJacket said:
Without an integrated subway entrance, this thing is worthless.
Click to expand...

Its still quite feasible and would be great for accessibility as they could, with a ramp as needed, create a single-level of connection into the building, (the current exit is two or three sets of stairs with a landing or landings. They could then have an elevator and an up escalator + stairs.

That said, the absolutely 'dumb' park did make any tunnel to the station more expensive by pushing the building further away.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top