Toronto 2 Queen West | 34.44m | 7s | Cadillac Fairview | Zeidler

If they're going to demolish and rebuild it, they could have at least set it back from the street a little farther to match the Harry Rosen to widen that pinch point of a narrow sidewalk and avoid that blank wall.

upload_2017-2-17_20-59-21-png.99206
 
MetroMan said:
If they're going to demolish and rebuild it, they could have at least set it back from the street a little farther to match the Harry Rosen to widen that pinch point of a narrow sidewalk and avoid that blank wall.
Click to expand...
The bridge has to line up with the same locations as the old one do to the By being a heritage building and that only one of the windows was allowed to be removed. I believe there was condition that if ever the bridge were removed completely they had to keep the window in storage to be reinstalled.
 
MetroMan said:
If they're going to demolish and rebuild it, they could have at least set it back from the street a little farther to match the Harry Rosen to widen that pinch point of a narrow sidewalk and avoid that blank wall.
Click to expand...

Why would they want to lose any square footage and end up with smaller floor plates?

This would need to be something led by the city, not the developer.
 
jje1000 said:
Why would they want to lose any square footage and end up with smaller floor plates?

This would need to be something led by the city, not the developer.
Click to expand...

Of course. In exchange for the approval for new density, give us some sidewalk space because it's too narrow at this corner.

EDIT: Look at the gap between the historical building and the Eaton Centre. That's more than enough room to push the building back enough to widen the Queen St sidewalk without losing square footage of retail/office space. That connecting building in the gap is just a security exit for the parking garage.

IMG_9694.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_9694.JPG
    IMG_9694.JPG
    1 MB · Views: 752
Last edited:
It's undeniable at some point most people felt the aluminum cladding was a good idea! If there had been an UrbanToronto, we would've been raving about this improvement to a dreary old building.
Full circle.
 
buildup said:
It's undeniable at some point most people felt the aluminum cladding was a good idea! If there had been an UrbanToronto, we would've been raving about this improvement to a dreary old building.
Full circle.
Click to expand...

So true. I'm so happy the place wasn't demolished.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wish they'd extend both the heritage and glass addition north up Yonge Street a little further. The Eaton Centre retail would have to be re-worked in that section but it would improve that stretch of Yonge. Yonge between Queen and Nordstrom on the west side has never been resolved well.
 
isaidso said:
I wish they'd extend both the heritage and glass addition north up Yonge Street a little further. The Eaton Centre retail would have to be re-worked in that section but it would improve that stretch of Yonge. Yonge between Queen and Nordstrom on the west side has never been resolved well.
Click to expand...

Cadillac Fairview has no interest in improving anything along Yonge there. They want people to be inside the mall rather than outside of it and what's worse, is they have extended as far out on the sidewalk as they possibly can to maximize their square footage.
 
maestro said:
The late 1990s reno was under the guise of bringing retail stores to the street in a faux heritage streetscape design. Look how that turned out.
Click to expand...
exactly all the store that have exterior access all keep those doors locked from the outside and they only open if there is a fire.
 
bcx said:
Cadillac Fairview has no interest in improving anything along Yonge there. They want people to be inside the mall rather than outside of it and what's worse, is they have extended as far out on the sidewalk as they possibly can to maximize their square footage.
Click to expand...
It'd be interesting if they were to get rid of the parking. Not sure how much it's being used, but the handful of times I've used it, it's been relatively easy with lots of parking. With Y&D square having its own parking lot, the population rise in urban areas, the decline in car ownership, the growth of downtown property values and a lack of suburban desire or incentive to drive downtown (especially when the inevitable congestion charge or freeway tolls get off the ground), it would seem that it's square footage that could make more money as shops.
 
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
 
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
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top