greenleaf said:
I completely disagree. Another grocery store could be really beneficial here. There are will be thousands of residents added here, plus everything going up on Charles. BSM in Manulife is already busy at all hours. I think the "little useless boxes" are actually needed. Big retail elements on Yonge don't make sense, unless on the 2nd floor. The whole street has small storefronts. They are needed here to keep the rhythm of the street for the pedestrian.
Click to expand...

We don't need more little useless boxes for retail. Major retailers have certain requirements in terms of store size/windows for display etc in order for the retail space to be attractive to them. So if the retail space is not designed properly and we get these tiny little boxes, we will get the usual hodgepodge of nail salons; dry cleaners etc.

I personally think a combination of major retailers; along with a couple of decent restaurants would be very welcomed addition to this corner.
 
The city should really try to make a size limit for ground retail. Many condos have retail built in but only big enough for a convenience store or a laundry service. Why cant the city make regulations big enough so that a shoppers or a metro would contemplate being there? Obviously not all condos need bigger spaces for retail but condos facing major city streets should. For instance if a condo were to go on queen street. The city should fin the average size on queen street that is used for businesses and make it mandatory that it is within that range.
 
That's a poor idea, sorry.

Most interesting and engaging retail is independent and can't afford the rent that would go along with large spaces on main streets. Think narrow resto's, cafes and clothing shops along Queen and King.

Sure not every space can be filled by such tenants and a certain amount of large spaces can be great, but if you start mandating certain sizes and push rent up, out of the reach of smaller retailers, we'll have more generic streets full of chain retail that everyone keeps complaining about. Developers/landlords perhaps need a little coaxing to take on a bit more risk by signing those unique tenants.
 
sixrings said:
The city should really try to make a size limit for ground retail. Many condos have retail built in but only big enough for a convenience store or a laundry service. Why cant the city make regulations big enough so that a shoppers or a metro would contemplate being there? Obviously not all condos need bigger spaces for retail but condos facing major city streets should. For instance if a condo were to go on queen street. The city should fin the average size on queen street that is used for businesses and make it mandatory that it is within that range.
Click to expand...

The short answer would be that not every building needs to be fitted with a Shoppers, a Metro or a Loblaws. If anything, in some parts of the city there seems to be a Shoppers every third block these days. It's the smaller stores that give the retail street life variety and vitality. Some of that has disappeared with new developments - particularly where chain stores are favoured and the rents are sometimes too high for small, independently owned retailers.
 
If Scotiabank sells the property, I don't see it being built as a Retail Only building, there will be a mid-rise/office/residential or some combination of the two built here.
 
With the densities going up around it whatever does end up on the Scotiabank site is going to be enormous. If they were to wait until after the 1BE, Morguard, and Cumberland developments top out I could easily see them pitching for Toronto's tallest on that site.
 
Well it's not that large of a site. You'd need the H&M and French Connection as well, which of course is possible.

But even with all that you're looking at a site roughly the same size as Uptown's footprint directly to the south. I would imagine there would also be some tower separation issues.
 
July 21
9349263332_fcc40a0302_b.jpg


9349262856_17f651651f_b.jpg


9349178226_8fc0887754_b.jpg


9346336369_4957a38a82_b.jpg


9346335659_c15c886e61_b.jpg


9349446838_f8f03f4fcd_b.jpg


9346659323_999f1903c9_b.jpg
 
drum118, I'm curious about your last two shots. Did they make a mistake in that one section and have to get the concrete off the rebar? Why does it look like there's a missing patch in the otherwise finished wall?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Sometimes they leave the rods exposed to allow for a tie-in to a beam or floor section. Not sure if that's what they've done here, but it would be my guess
 
Okay, something weird just happend on the site.

(I overlook the site from the 14th floor of my office and just kind of gaze out there when I caught this.)

Main tower crane is hooked up to one of the big wall forms lying flat on the ground.

It begins to lift it and one of the construction workers sits on the edge of the form as it's going up. It seems like he's riding it up almost as a joke or something.

As it gets about five feet off the ground it stops and the construction worker hops off.

I can then see him on the walkie talkie looking up at the crane operator.

He then throws the walkie talkie down take his hammer out of his belt and throws it hard across the contruction site about forty feet away.

Then he takes his helmet off and throws it hard at the ground and it bounces away.

He then goes and picks everything up and storms around the site for about five minutes by himself.

Then he climbs the big tower crane and the operator and him have a talk and then he heads back down.

What the heck did I just see?!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top