Automation Gallery
Superstar
I guess we'll have to stay tuned for a 65 storey/200m condo development and a city owned parkette for this location
Toronto 260 Adelaide West | 196.8m | 61s | CentreCourt | Sweeny &Co
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
cd concept
Senior Member
Since we have two supertalls and two close to it proposed in this section of town. Do you think maybe we can see a 250 m tower here because of its lot size? It would be nice!
Tasmanian Tiger
New Member
I’d prefer not to see a building built here, as it is directly in line with the CN Tower and would detract from what is virtually an unimpeded path, directly facing the Tower. Basically most oblique angles from which one can view the CN Tower are obstructed, to some extent, thus, it would be nice to see this ‘straight on’ view corridor preserved in perpetuity. Ideally, this site would be turned into a park. In addition to that, I've always wanted to see the adjacent BellMedia (MuchMusic) building's parking lot, and accompanying fence, removed and turned into a public square.
Having a parking lot here, on the one of the most vibrant stretches of Queen West, is an eyesore, and a waste of valuable land. It would be better utilized as a public space. I assume that BellMedia owns said parking lot, though, and wouldn't be in a hurry to use it for alternative purposes; though the City could offer some incentives that might persuade them. A square at that site, combined with a park at 229 Richmond St, would tie in nicely together, and provide and enhanced visual and ambient experience of the CN Tower backdrop (see street view image below for clarification).
P.S. I've always wondered why the BellMedia building has such strange proportions. It appears that the low Richmond St portion was a later add on, but why is the building so irregular in shape (namely the blacked out brick sections)? Were their neighbouring buildings on site, at one point, that it was built around?
Also, does BellMedia own the building on the left side of the image (with the mural)? If so, it would be great if that could be turned into a rooftop patio, overlooking a potential square, where the parking lot currently is. Said building could even be demolished to accommodate a larger square (though, that would be less likely, and might not be the best idea, as it could be put to better use).
https://www.google.com/maps/place/2...81b10ce6f5a2c5!8m2!3d43.6502832!4d-79.3904648
Having a parking lot here, on the one of the most vibrant stretches of Queen West, is an eyesore, and a waste of valuable land. It would be better utilized as a public space. I assume that BellMedia owns said parking lot, though, and wouldn't be in a hurry to use it for alternative purposes; though the City could offer some incentives that might persuade them. A square at that site, combined with a park at 229 Richmond St, would tie in nicely together, and provide and enhanced visual and ambient experience of the CN Tower backdrop (see street view image below for clarification).
P.S. I've always wondered why the BellMedia building has such strange proportions. It appears that the low Richmond St portion was a later add on, but why is the building so irregular in shape (namely the blacked out brick sections)? Were their neighbouring buildings on site, at one point, that it was built around?
Also, does BellMedia own the building on the left side of the image (with the mural)? If so, it would be great if that could be turned into a rooftop patio, overlooking a potential square, where the parking lot currently is. Said building could even be demolished to accommodate a larger square (though, that would be less likely, and might not be the best idea, as it could be put to better use).
https://www.google.com/maps/place/2...81b10ce6f5a2c5!8m2!3d43.6502832!4d-79.3904648
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
This site is the subject of a report to the February 8th mtg of the Toronto Parking Authority.
Report here: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/pa/bgrd/backgroundfile-160452.pdf
Said report envisions a 3-level underground Green P Parking Garage with City park atop said facility.
I would certainly be disappointed to see all that money invested, for that outcome.
The Fire Hall parcel is not discussed in this report.
What's being sought here is the money to get to 30% design in order to assess the financial viability in greater detail:
While in the grand scheme of things this isn't much money; I'd rather put a pin in that balloon now.
I want to see a comprehensive plan for both sites, and, if it makes sense, the land of any adjacent owner.
The adjoining lands fronting John Street now assembled, I'd be inclined to limit any new Green P facility the footprint of any buildings, and leave the park unencumbered.
Clearly, the City hasn't given up on that idea, as per the report:
I think that's the way to go.
Report here: https://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2021/pa/bgrd/backgroundfile-160452.pdf
Said report envisions a 3-level underground Green P Parking Garage with City park atop said facility.
I would certainly be disappointed to see all that money invested, for that outcome.
The Fire Hall parcel is not discussed in this report.
What's being sought here is the money to get to 30% design in order to assess the financial viability in greater detail:
While in the grand scheme of things this isn't much money; I'd rather put a pin in that balloon now.
I want to see a comprehensive plan for both sites, and, if it makes sense, the land of any adjacent owner.
The adjoining lands fronting John Street now assembled, I'd be inclined to limit any new Green P facility the footprint of any buildings, and leave the park unencumbered.
Clearly, the City hasn't given up on that idea, as per the report:
I think that's the way to go.
Last edited:
allengeorge
Senior Member
How does the TPA determine where parking is required, and how much?
bilked
Senior Member
Not sure how the phrase "explore new opportunities to secure parking or parking delivered at a more efficient cost" has any place in the planning equation here.
This is one of the most important remaining undeveloped parcels in the City. It's a public asset and not just some part of the Toronto Parking Authority's fiefdom.
This is one of the most important remaining undeveloped parcels in the City. It's a public asset and not just some part of the Toronto Parking Authority's fiefdom.
Northern Light
Superstar
In this particular case, we see this paragraph in the report showing how this unfolded:
At its meeting of October 29, 2019 City Council declared 260 Adelaide surplus and authorized the purchase of 229 Richmond. City Council directed CreateTO along with Corporate Real Estate Management and City Planning to report back in 2020 on a Precinct Plan for the combined sites (260 Adelaide & 229 Richmond) and adjacent properties as appropriate along with a business plan to activate these sites with City uses such as affordable housing, parks, public parking managed by Toronto Parking Authority, childcare, and any other uses as may be suitable.
Green P also already had the Entertainment District on its list of places that would need parking.
It owns the lots next to Spadina and Adelaide which are the subject of a park and development proposal in another thread, and they are utilized at 95-99% which suggests the economic opportunity in additional spaces.
Doubtless this is less about the desirability of the parking through, than the potential revenue, and getting Green P to eat some/all of the cost of developing the park. (speculation on my part, but I think, a good guess)
Northern Light
Superstar
Agreed.
Though they've been invited in, here.
What I would like to see is a complete concept for the entire site (meaning this parcel, the fire hall, and preferably some integration and perhaps swapping with Tridel involving their adjacent property at 241 Richmond West.)
I think any new parking should be located under new buildings, and leave the park unencumbered.
Any park over a garage will have to have its vegetation stripped away every few decades to work on the roof/membrane of the garage. Not desirable.
Last edited:
isaidso
Senior Member
Ha! I was just about to post that the area desperately needs space set aside for a park or public square. What a pleasant surprise.
And agree that underground parking shouldn't go here. Put it under new office towers if one must but leave this lot alone.
Red_Bulmer
New Member
Not a chance, Queen Street West is protected from shadowing. There won't be anything taller than Picasso which is about 125m.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
So currently, we're at:
- $100m for the land
- $50-70m to construct the garage
- $15-20m for the park above
- ~$180m total?
bilked
Senior Member
I really don't understand it. The City has the $100M to buy the land, but then needs to partner with the dinosaurs at the TPA to find the $$ to build a park on top?
Even at a back-of-the-napkin stage this is so unambitious and underwhelming.
Anyone know who exactly to contact at CreateTO on this file to send a "NO TO A PARKING GARAGE AT 229 RICHMOND" type email to?
Even at a back-of-the-napkin stage this is so unambitious and underwhelming.
Anyone know who exactly to contact at CreateTO on this file to send a "NO TO A PARKING GARAGE AT 229 RICHMOND" type email to?
condovo
Senior Member
^^^ Should the city be spending $100 million on this one parcel of land? Why not spend $100 million on the land behind Metropolitan United Church on Shuter instead? Or maybe the city has $200 million and it can buy both? Maybe its budget isn't finite?
Northern Light
Superstar
Well, the 100M is spent now.
What should have happened is that before the City approved the first shift to residential here w/the Two Kings plan way back when, the City should have quietly bought up exactly two parcels in the district, at an 80% or greater discount to today's prices.
It should then have proceeded w/the rezoning and implemented the park when a critical mass of occupancy had been achieved.
Foresight is a great thing; but insufficiently common.
*****
Between the 2 sites you mention, the land surrounding Metropolitan United is the more important parcel for parks and heritage reasons.
*****
In the alternate universe mentioned above, here's what I would have liked to see considered (any 2 of the 4 highlighted sites would have worked)
Adding the park next to Blue Jays Way/Front would been very affordable back then; the site is actually large enough to sport a soccer pitch.
The site where Bell Light Box sits was nothing but parking and a car wash. I love TIFF, I hate this building. I wish the one-time plan had gone ahead for them to takeover the Uptown theatre.
An extension of Simcoe Place Park in an L-Shape would have delivered usable space.
As would an extension of Grange Park.
Too bad, that's in an alternate timeline.
Last edited:
Northern Light
Superstar
Since CreateTO doesn't list this site as an active project; I vote for sending an email to the CEO and let him sort out who gets to answer it.
Steven Trumper, CEO, CreateTO, strumper@createto.ca