Speculating about a new start at 1 Bloor East

[adma]

I would have no objection to any big box LCBOs at this location, as long as it is 80s

Yeah, real 80s. Like something out of the Pee-Wee Herman show

 

[Alex S]

Why

Look at what's happening now. 1 bloor is gone and now L tower isn't looking promising either.

 

[Northern Magus]

The location is perfect for a public square which would spark high-density intensification to the south of it, which quite honestly is an area that needs some help. And a square would be a perfect anchor for Bloor West, acting as a magnet for even more people and activity.

IMO the benefits would be tremendous and more than pay for the costs -- several times over. I agree that the area needs tall condos and office towers to be built. A square would be their catalyst and focal point.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

The location is perfect for a public square which would spark high-density intensification to the south of it, which quite honestly is an area that needs some help. And a square would be a perfect anchor for Bloor West, acting as a magnet for even more people and activity.

IMO the benefits would be tremendous and more than pay for the costs -- several times over. I agree that the area needs tall condos and office towers to be built. A square would be their catalyst and focal point.

How would a public square at Yonge and Bloor on some of the most expensive property in the city be able to pay for itself several times over?

 

[Northern Magus]

Geek: that's actually not what I said. I said that the benefits would more than pay for the costs (i.e. that it would be a very smart investment).

And I should probably point out that if the property was truly as expensive as you seem to believe, it wouldn't have been used to house a Harveys.

 

[AKS]

Geek: that's actually not what I said. I said that the benefits would more than pay for the costs (i.e. that it would be a very smart investment).

And I should probably point out that if the property was truly as expensive as you seem to believe, it wouldn't have been used to house a Harveys.

harvey's and the others who owned the land probably made a lot of money. Bazis acquired the land for 63 million. If the city acquired the land from Bazis, it would probably be the most expensive park owned by the city.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Geek: that's actually not what I said. I said that the benefits would more than pay for the costs (i.e. that it would be a very smart investment).

And I should probably point out that if the property was truly as expensive as you seem to believe, it wouldn't have been used to house a Harveys.

I honestly don't understand your line of thinking about how this would be a smart investment for the City, how it would pay for itself or be a "smart investment"?
Goodness knows, I'm a strong supporter of parks and public squares, but I'll be honest, I don't think that this is the location for one.

 

[Northern Magus]

My reasoning is fairly straightforward: public squares are as magnets for people and activity -- in fact, well done ones are catalysts for it (cf Dundas Square). They lead to revitalization and intensification, both of which cause an increase in development fees paid and property values (which boost city revenues via property taxes).

One large condo building might contribute somewhat to these, but a well designed public square would attract far more, and lead to much more revitalization. The location is perfect: it's the nexus of the city, the crossroads of its public transit, and the end of one of its best shopping districts. A public square would help turn the intersection into a must-visit, thriving destination. More people would want to live there, more tourists would want to visit, and its shops, restaurants and amenities would have more customers and more revenue. I also think it would help spur revitalization and intensification down that stretch of Yonge St, and (possibly) eastward towards the top of Church.

So like I said, IMO the cumulative effect of such an investment would more than pay for itself within 10-12 years. A public square would rock.

 

[MuchoGrande]

My reasoning is fairly straightforward: public squares are as magnets for people and activity -- in fact, well done ones are catalysts for it (cf Dundas Square). They lead to revitalization and intensification, both of which cause an increase in development fees paid and property values (which boost city revenues via property taxes).

One large condo building might contribute somewhat to these, but a well designed public square would attract far more, and lead to much more revitalization. The location is perfect: it's the nexus of the city, the crossroads of its public transit, and the end of one of its best shopping districts. A public square would help turn the intersection into a must-visit, thriving destination. More people would want to live there, more tourists would want to visit, and its shops, restaurants and amenities would have more customers and more revenue. I also think it would help spur revitalization and intensification down that stretch of Yonge St, and (possibly) eastward towards the top of Church.

So like I said, IMO the cumulative effect of such an investment would more than pay for itself within 10-12 years. A public square would rock.

If we're going to spend over $50mill for a park I would prefer to see it larger and more special than a postage stamp at a congested intersection. The cash-in-lieu of parkland that the eventual developer of this site has to pay (has it been paid already?) would provide a tremendous boost for improvements to other existing parks or for new ones elsewhere.

 

[Tewder]

I also don't think a square is right for this intersection. It's too small a site for anything Bryant Park-ish. It's not the 'lay back and chill' kind of environment that you find in NPS, and Dundas Square is too close to compete for the hub of crowds and noise that you find at Yonge/Dundas. Now Soho on Queen West would be perfect for Toronto's next stab at an engaging urban public space but leave Yonge and Bloor for more supertalls and let the area emerge as the city's midtown cluster.

 

[Northern Magus]

Mucho: I don't think you're grasping the difference between a park and a square. A park (or in this case, a parkette) would be inappropriate, and the area already has several. A square, however, would be both appropriate and canny. Remember that there's often a difference between something's cost and its value. As I've said, the return on the investment for this would be considerable through redevelopment, intensification, and acting as a catalyst and magnet. Its value would therefore far exceed its costs, which at any rate would probably be recovered within 10-12 years IMO.

Tewder: I agree with you completely about Queen/Soho and think it would be equally perfect. For Yonge/Bloor, a design competition would allow a proper consideration of its design so that it's properly contextualized to its site. I disagree that it would compete with Yonge/Dundas for the simple reason that its design competition would ensure that it's somewhat different in terms of form, function, pedestrian traffic and uses (that said, remember that the Eaton Centre and its surrounding stores aren't "too close" to Bloor West -- both thrive). On top of that, by acting as a catalyst for development and intensification, a Yonge/Bloor square would have local users all its own to sustain it.

So if there's going to be a new start at 1 Bloor E, I still think that a public square would be best.

 

[MuchoGrande]

Mucho: I don't think you're grasping the difference between a park and a square. A park (or in this case, a parkette) would be inappropriate, and the area already has several. A square, however, would be both appropriate and canny. Remember that there's often a difference between something's cost and its value. As I've said, the return on the investment for this would be considerable through redevelopment, intensification, and acting as a catalyst and magnet. Its value would therefore far exceed its costs, which at any rate would probably be recovered within 10-12 years IMO.

Tewder: I agree with you completely about Queen/Soho and think it would be equally perfect. For Yonge/Bloor, a design competition would allow a proper consideration of its design so that it's properly contextualized to its site. I disagree that it would compete with Yonge/Dundas for the simple reason that its design competition would ensure that it's somewhat different in terms of form, function, pedestrian traffic and uses (that said, remember that the Eaton Centre and its surrounding stores aren't "too close" to Bloor West -- both thrive). On top of that, by acting as a catalyst for development and intensification, a Yonge/Bloor square would have local users all its own to sustain it.

So if there's going to be a new start at 1 Bloor E, I still think that a public square would be best.

No doubt, having a public square at such an important and valuable intersection would be a bold statement for the City. There would a tremendous number of people that would visit it and it would be a valuable asset in a City that doesn't have much in the way of squares.

However, the immediate area is for the most part completely built out and there is limited potential for redevelopment and intensification, at least relative to other areas in the City. My concern is that if the value of the land is in excess of $50 million as we understand from the papers, the cost (plus improvements to create a significant square) far exceeds the benefits. $50 mill buys a lot of land (for parks or squares) in Toronto if it's not at one of the most desirable undeveloped intersections.

The City's coffers are empty and our existing parks are in poor condition. Other areas could use the injection of $50 million for a square or park and provide a much, much greater return, social and/or financial. Think of what that money could do for some of the disadvantaged neighbourhoods that could stand to see better parks and facilities.

Foregoing intense development on this site also would prevent the humoungus stimulus from retail, hotel and residential uses - development charges alone would be over $10 million and realty taxes generated would be massive for years to come. This is perhaps the most appropriate vacant site in the City for intense redevelopment.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

The City's coffers are empty and our existing parks are in poor condition. Other areas could use the injection of $50 million for a square or park and provide a much, much greater return, social and/or financial. Think of what that money could do for some of the disadvantaged neighbourhoods that could stand to see better parks and facilities.

Our parks are not in poor condition! Get out there and look around.

 

[vultur09]

Mucho: I don't think you're grasping the difference between a park and a square. A park (or in this case, a parkette) would be inappropriate, and the area already has several. A square, however, would be both appropriate and canny. Remember that there's often a difference between something's cost and its value. As I've said, the return on the investment for this would be considerable through redevelopment, intensification, and acting as a catalyst and magnet. Its value would therefore far exceed its costs, which at any rate would probably be recovered within 10-12 years IMO.

Tewder: I agree with you completely about Queen/Soho and think it would be equally perfect. For Yonge/Bloor, a design competition would allow a proper consideration of its design so that it's properly contextualized to its site. I disagree that it would compete with Yonge/Dundas for the simple reason that its design competition would ensure that it's somewhat different in terms of form, function, pedestrian traffic and uses (that said, remember that the Eaton Centre and its surrounding stores aren't "too close" to Bloor West -- both thrive). On top of that, by acting as a catalyst for development and intensification, a Yonge/Bloor square would have local users all its own to sustain it.

So if there's going to be a new start at 1 Bloor E, I still think that a public square would be best.

Save the Square for Yonge Eglinton once the new subway line is completed. That location is an equally qualified representation of the crossroads of the 416 anyway.

At One Bloor I think we will eventually find a middle of the road 50-60 storey mixed-use hotel/condo point tower with retail at the podium. I would love to see some sort of performing arts venue similar to the Jazz at Lincoln Center (The RIM Jazz Centre anyone?). Or how about moving the U of T school of architecture right into the building! If they could find a cultural anchor like that I believe it would more than make up for the sub-standard design and architecture that we are sure to receive once the site is officially transferred into local hands and Tim Hortonified.

 

[urbandreamer]

How about a new public library here+ square with farmer's market. Transfer the density from the site to those neighbouring low-rise shacks on Charles and across the street on Yonge. Imagine the square surrounded by stunning 10-50 story highrises! Knock down the old reference library and build a mixed-use highrise or three on that site!

Thus, Toronto gets a new library (10 floors perhaps, retail at base) and a gorgeous square and perhaps 20 new beautiful (aA or better) highrises! Cost to the city under my plan: Zero.