Toronto Chelsea Green (was 33 Gerrard) | 297.25m | 90s | Great Eagle | a—A

Someone earlier mentioned renderings, but they weren't featured in the UT article; do they indeed exist? I sincerely hope they're more Mirvish-Gehry and less Cityplace/Pinnacle on Young.
 
ADRM said:
Someone earlier mentioned renderings, but they weren't featured in the UT article; do they indeed exist? I sincerely hope they're more Mirvish-Gehry and less Cityplace/Pinnacle on Young.
Click to expand...

The renderings described were for a previous concept, which does not reflect what is currently being proposed.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
It still is. In any case, it's very much a mid-range family hotel - though one that is showing its' age. They just went through some significant reno though, so I don't see it getting torn down that soon (who knows, I have been wrong before).

Mind you, the one major bonus is the possible removal of the off-Gerrard garage entrance.

AoD
Click to expand...

I wonder if the phasing of the proposed redevelopment includes developing the SW half of the property first, which is basically the parking lot to the west of the hotel. That would allow the hotel to stay open for several more years before they'd have to do anything with it. I also wonder if one of the two towers in the SW portion will be the new hotel. If that's the case, they can simply do a 'flip', opening the new hotel the day they close the old one.
 
gweed123 said:
I wonder if the phasing of the proposed redevelopment includes developing the SW half of the property first, which is basically the parking lot to the west of the hotel. That would allow the hotel to stay open for several more years before they'd have to do anything with it. I also wonder if one of the two towers in the SW portion will be the new hotel. If that's the case, they can simply do a 'flip', opening the new hotel the day they close the old one.
Click to expand...

I dont know, i believe that by the time this development gets approval and marketed (say 5yrs), there will be many other 3-4star hotels (that are now under construction) opened
ill predict this thing just closes its doors, gets demolished and gives way for the new development to proceed
 
There are a few new hotel properties proposed or under construction in central Toronto, but nothing of the size that would replace the net loss of 1290 rooms from this site.

42
 
I really doubt they will get four towers at the heights proposed here... Probably a shoot for the moon, land among the stars strategy.
 
Automation Gallery said:
I dont know, i believe that by the time this development gets approval and marketed (say 5yrs), there will be many other 3-4star hotels (that are now under construction) opened
ill predict this thing just closes its doors, gets demolished and gives way for the new development to proceed
Click to expand...

That's true, but for the employees there, it would be pretty hard to fire them for 4 years and then hire them back. Just seems easier to do the construction on the parking lot portion of the site now, and then just flip it over once that's done. Also keeps a smaller construction crew on for longer.
 
It would be fantastic if they City could facilitate the northward expansion of the PATH system as part of this application! Great observation.
 
There is going to be so much density in this area with so many new enormous towers they would be foolish not to consider some underground pathways to help facilitate the movement of pedestrians. Even with the proposed widened sidewalks on Yonge Street, I feel like the pedestrian traffic is going to be so jammed that creating underground networks are a must to include moving forward.
 
Automation Gallery said:
I dont know, i believe that by the time this development gets approval and marketed (say 5yrs), there will be many other 3-4star hotels (that are now under construction) opened
ill predict this thing just closes its doors, gets demolished and gives way for the new development to proceed
Click to expand...

Yeah, I think that's right—tough to predict, because Langham is considerably more upscale than what's currently there. I imagine the existing structure wouldn't be useful for Langham's purposes, as it'd be both way too big and too difficult to turn into a luxury offering.
 
Larissa Doherty said:
There is going to be so much density in this area with so many new enormous towers they would be foolish not to consider some underground pathways to help facilitate the movement of pedestrians. Even with the proposed widened sidewalks on Yonge Street, I feel like the pedestrian traffic is going to be so jammed that creating underground networks are a must to include moving forward.
Click to expand...

Yes, and I also hope the various city review panels/consultation net us out with a significant public space investment agreement in and around the development. That's a whole bunch of humungous structures packed very tightly around each other. Throw in Aura down the street, and it's going to feel pretty overwhelming.
 
I have to imagine that the northeast corner of this intersection will also see action soon.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top