interchange42 said:
When 2 Dundas was to be a skyscraping rental tower, it was proposed with no parking, as Cadillac Fairview's shopping centre side was giving up none of the Eaton Centre parking to the residential side: CadFair have guaranteed their retail tenants that there are a certain number of parking spaces available for their potential customers to use. Besides, reducing the number of spaces would likely require City approval as well, as the City mandates a certain number of parking spaces for retail developments as well.

(The zero parking spaces for the rental tower was one of the objections that Kristyn Wong Tam had to the proposal, and that helped kill it. Meanwhile, I suspect that the parking is likely used more on the weekend by shoppers, more during 9-5 weekdays by office workers.)

42
Click to expand...

Also I wonder if they can move towards those automated parking systems with a far smaller footprint than what they have now. Also chunks of the existing podium along James St. seems ripe for redevelopment (and maybe a better spot for a small elevated garage compared to Yonge).

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
My understanding the parking is meant more for the office towers, not the mall per se so it might not be that easy to get rid of completely. Though it would be nice if they can get away with less parking and redevelop at least part of the garage.

From another perspective - Eaton Centre will likely be facing some serious competition in the coming decades and I can't help but imagine the benefit of additional footage.

AoD
Click to expand...

CF is probably salivating at the latest Sears Canada news.

They had the opportunity to consolidate all the parking when the Ryerson building went up allowing the East side to be redeveloped with more retail and office space. I guess there were concerns with office tenants balking at having to walk farther to their parking. You have to be pretty crazy to commute by car to Yonge and Dundas.
 
maestro said:
CF is probably salivating at the latest Sears Canada news.

They had the opportunity to consolidate all the parking when the Ryerson building went up allowing the East side to be redeveloped with more retail and office space. I guess there were concerns with office tenants balking at having to walk farther to their parking. You have to be pretty crazy to commute by car to Yonge and Dundas.
Click to expand...

There are some concepts floating around of the old upper floors of Sears being converted to office space (it's still empty atm?).
 
maestro said:
CF is probably salivating at the latest Sears Canada news.

They had the opportunity to consolidate all the parking when the Ryerson building went up allowing the East side to be redeveloped with more retail and office space. I guess there were concerns with office tenants balking at having to walk farther to their parking. You have to be pretty crazy to commute by car to Yonge and Dundas.
Click to expand...

As someone with many friends in the GTA; there's a mindset that seems to exist where people believe that things are better if they take their own cars. Even if it's 2 hours of commute each way with traffic (as a friend once had to do), having to remain alert and cursing traffic all the way, it's somehow more desirable than having to spend time around other human beings in a public transit environment.

I don't get it. And I grew up in rural Ontario where you couldn't do anything if you didn't have a car. The attachment we as humans have to these things is bizarre.
 
This rebuild can't come soon enough. That tacky al. siding has cursed this corner for nigh on 2 decades. The new version will add much-needed class and heritage to the improving Queen St end of the EC.
 
Irishmonk said:
This rebuild can't come soon enough. That tacky al. siding has cursed this corner for nigh on 2 decades. The new version will add much-needed class and heritage to the improving Queen St end of the EC.
Click to expand...

I can't agree more. The current look of the buildings is so 'Dynasty'. Having said that I worked in a restaurant in the 80's and one of the Hostesses (That was the term then) worked in the architectural offices that coverted this building (And saved it). So the look was of its time.
 
IMG_6048.JPG
IMG_6047.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_6048.JPG
    IMG_6048.JPG
    287.6 KB · Views: 628
  • IMG_6047.JPG
    IMG_6047.JPG
    242.3 KB · Views: 579
It blows my mind the mentality of the past (and present) to cover up some of these buildings in gaudy materials. Some really nice brick work that will shine with some restoration.
 
Contra said:
It blows my mind the mentality of the past (and present) to cover up some of these buildings in gaudy materials. Some really nice brick work that will shine with some restoration.
Click to expand...

Definitely so- especially all the buildings that were covered up with the awful brown/green aluminum siding in the 70s. I always wonder how many buildings were lost because people overlooked the fact that beyond the siding, the original facade might have still been there in some form.

At least this PoMo project had the sincerity of leaving some of the original facade revealed.
 
Last edited:
Contra said:
It blows my mind the mentality of the past (and present) to cover up some of these buildings in gaudy materials. Some really nice brick work that will shine with some restoration.
Click to expand...

Money? It's cheaper to cover than to restore/rebuild.
 
And actually, that was some of the logic behind the 80s solution--magically revealing that which was concealed by the latter-day Woolworth screen; and then restoring what could be restored within a limited budget. And someday, perhaps, another developer might undertake a "fuller" restoration--as is currently happening. (The fact that the panels were simply overlaid on the original façade indicates that such potential was in mind.)
 
And a lot of what we see as grubby disfigurement was almost certainly "as found" in 1986.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top