I dunno...redoing entire Line 2 while building the Willis Tower 2.0 here on top of that. I'd think we'll be older than Frank Gehry before (and if) they ever get that passed City Council. /sigh
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
I dunno...redoing entire Line 2 while building the Willis Tower 2.0 here on top of that. I'd think we'll be older than Frank Gehry before (and if) they ever get that passed City Council. /sigh
Click to expand...

Line 2 will not be an architectural/interior design lift across the board, unless the project has been re-scoped.

What this is, first and foremost is ATC; along with, probably Platform Edge Doors, some SOGR work, some capacity expansion at selection stations; finishing any outstanding second exit work; a few accessibility upgrades.

There are stations that could use to a top-to-bottom gut; but I doubt that will be seen here.

As to timing, assuming the SSE moves ahead this year (tender); then the new signal system is a requirement for 2030'ish.

Everything else may be subject to budgetary restraint.
 
Undead said:
@Northern Light what sort of use mix and height would strike the best balance between economics and city building in this redevelopment?
Click to expand...

Well, that partly depends on what is really being contemplated/what is really on the table.

Is it merely the office tower and the western 1/2 of the department store?

Or is it the hotel, now being renovated, that's integrated into same (different owner)?

What else might be assembled? Quite possibly nothing else; on the other hand, there's a potential development site to the north at Yonge/Asquith; an old Bell Building on Asquith, and comparatively small condos along Park Rd.

****

The challenges are myriad, but how you address them depends in large part on what's available to redevelop.

****

The City's objectives here will be: (in my estimation)

Yonge-Bloor Station (ideal expansion/layout)
Architectural excellence
Animating Bloor
Affordable Housing. ( the City seems interested in this on-site)

My take; I really don't think the housing makes sense here, for the simple reason that you could get more housing elsewhere (better bang for the buck).

I'd be inclined to have the City make one of its Housing Now sites available and tell Brookfield that its benefit is building the affordable housing off-site at no cost to the City.

I think the yield on unit total would be higher; and in a City with a housing crisis, that matters.

Otherwise, I'm fine w/the goals above.

I don't think any on-site park space makes sense.

If the City doesn't have all the $$ lined up, I'd be inclined to divert parks money to the eastward extension of Cumberland Park to Bay street.

If that is covered off by developments now in the pipeline, then there are ample other area parks in need of investment.

****

At the end of the day, there are better experts than I at the cost of demo'ing the existing tower; and I simply don't know what the $$$ involved in any termination/buy-out clauses would be.

So it's very hard to say what the exact balance would/could/should be.

But I would follow the ideas that are outlined above.

To my way of thinking, the more of the existing site that is cleared, the better the economics get; but the higher the risk profile.

That would be up to Brookfield and to any adjacent landowners they might approach.

****

A final observation, you touched on height.

If you're starting over........it makes sense to look at the height precedent of One Bloor West for the peak tower.

But at that height, I'd rather see a thin, residential-only tower.

The challenge then would be finding room on site to replace the office space, ideally w/something in the 50 storey range (with larger commercial floor heights, the object would be to have it appear ~ 2/3 as tall.)

That's both an aesthetic choice, but also one that assumes ROI is achieved by a material increase in commercial ft2; and by developing a sufficiently signature building that it commands top $ per ft2.

But that's personal preference, not an absolute truth.
 
Northern Light said:
Line 2 will not be an architectural/interior design lift across the board, unless the project has been re-scoped.

What this is, first and foremost is ATC; along with, probably Platform Edge Doors, some SOGR work, some capacity expansion at selection stations; finishing any outstanding second exit work; a few accessibility upgrades.

There are stations that could use to a top-to-bottom gut; but I doubt that will be seen here.

As to timing, assuming the SSE moves ahead this year (tender); then the new signal system is a requirement for 2030'ish.

Everything else may be subject to budgetary restraint.
Click to expand...
ATC?
SOGR?
SSE?
WTF?
 
They are taking the signage off the south side of the tower today. I’m happy to see it go, it has been in disrepair now for years.
6EDEBA38-2085-4D99-9ADD-DBE6A4394D44.jpeg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top