Toronto Atrium on Bay Expansion | 114m | 34s | KingSett Capital | Hariri Pontarini

urbandreamer said:
Looks like Blacktower.tv was right, and this poster was wrong:

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...e-Gap-future-condo-site-)?p=540759#post540759

Clearly the old Gap location is going highrise condo. I'd go for 75s here.
Click to expand...

From DCN.....http://www.dailycommercialnews.com/...f6dbe9763c74&projectid=9147664&region=ontario
Nothing we already dont know, except for the tall tower rumour....
But it does make you wonder if there is not to be a further application.

COMMERCIAL OFFICES, RETAIL ADDN
Proj: 9147664-1
Toronto, Metro Toronto Reg ON
CONTEMPLATED
Atrium, 595 Bay St, M7A 2C7
$35,000,000 est
Note:...This project is very preliminary. Owner has submitted rezoning application to the city. There are no schedules at this time for design, tender, or construction. Further update spring 2012.
Owner will not accept unsolicited phone calls.
Project:...proposed construction a 5-storey addition to a mixed use building. This will raise the buildings height from 13-storeys to 18-storeys.
Scope:..5 storeys
Development:..Addition
Category:..Commercial offices; Retail, wholesale services
 
I had forgotten about the Gap rumour. I can't see the city being too concerned about building heights at that location, but I also can't see how any additional parking could be included for a new tower. It also seems like a no-brainer location for a hotel operator (I could see a W at Yonge/Dundas, easily). Having a hotel on the lower floors would also make it easier to incorporate space for signage and advertising facing Dundas Square.

If the Gap did go high-rise I actually wouldn't be opposed to them dismantling the facade and reincoporating it into the base of the new building. As it is the sidewalks on the NW corner are so narrow that I'd be willing to trade a little bit of historical authenticity for an extra few feet of sidewalk space.

And really, if the stairs to the subway could be relocated inside a new building that would be a big help, too. I like the urbanity of the sidewalk subway entrances but I find they're really obtrusive at times, and they're always a mess in the winters.
 
urbandreamer said:
Looks like Blacktower.tv was right, and this poster was wrong:

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...e-Gap-future-condo-site-)?p=540759#post540759

Clearly the old Gap location is going highrise condo. I'd go for 75s here.
Click to expand...

Sorry? How was I wrong? A 5 story additional is suddenly akin to a 75 story condo on a different plot of land? Again... there is no proof to the old gap location going condo. I don't even see how its feasible from an engineering standpoint; you're talking about a floor plate maybe the size of Trump which would have to be built directly on top of a subway station.
 
kkgg7 said:
Perfect location for a flagship store of Target.
Click to expand...

I would have thought Target would have taken over Sears' location - but Target is now really taking it to Sears going toe-to-toe with its HQ and store. Knowing what I know about the upper management at Sears HQ I suspect Target to win...
 
Subsequent posts regarding Sears at the Eaton Centre have been moved to this thread.

42
 
It makes you wonder why the place was ever branded as 'on Bay' rather than 'on Yonge' to start with?

Likely for the leasing of the office space...
Click to expand...

Yonge Street was very scummy in those days. Leasing space would have been easier on a project branded Bay rather than Yonge.
 
Seems as though Toronto Traditions die hard. Yonge is maintaining it's scummier than Bay rep to this day. Although one could argue that this intersection and north, Bay Street is over sanitized.

Was walking through the Atruim yesterday and by chance I was thinking about the possible renovation/addition job, wondering if the skylight would be covered during the re-fit, or if the sunlight would remain visible. Guess I can ponder on that one, once work begins on this one.
 
They might cover the skylight temporarily during construction, but they're building around it. It probably won't get as much sun exposure as it currently does tho, once it's boxed in.
 
One of my most hated buildings in the city... its long low form would surely be more at home near the airport or some other suburban location. If they were going for any sort of expansion at all, I wish that it was a significant highrise (or 2!). The Atrium as it exists is responsible for one of the largest gaps in the skyline north of Queen and is a sort of dead zone on the Bay St end. For those suggesting alternate names, shouldnt it be the Atrium on Dundas where it has the most frontage? Anyways, hard to get excited about this as it is unlikely to produce anything redeeming out of the original form... and its a wasted vertical opportunity.
 
Ed007Toronto said:
Yonge Street was very scummy in those days. Leasing space would have been easier on a project branded Bay rather than Yonge.
Click to expand...

Yet curiously, if one goes back 40 or 50 years, it was the Bay end that was truly scummy, what with the Ford Hotel/bus terminal array--Yonge was still legitimate enough (at least south of Yonge, pre-Eaton Centre) for reputable retailers...

Oh, and the form of AoB actually offers itself well to department store reuse--remember from Marshall Field to Galeries Lafayette, all those places arranged around sometimes-spectacular light courts...
 
There's a lot not to like about the Atrium on Bay, but here's something worth preserving: its reflective glass really amplifies the bright lights of Dundas Square better than any other building in the area.
 
I guess they have chopped one floor..

Site Plan Approval 12 131388 STE 27 SA Ward 27
- Tor & E.York Mar 2, 2012 --- --- --- ---
site plan approval to add 4 new stories to each tower of atrium on bay
 
Automation Gallery said:
I guess they have chopped one floor..

Site Plan Approval 12 131388 STE 27 SA Ward 27
- Tor & E.York Mar 2, 2012 --- --- --- ---
site plan approval to add 4 new stories to each tower of atrium on bay
Click to expand...

why? They should have added two 45 storey office towers. 17 storey is too low for Yonge/Dundas.
 
kkgg7... I think you misunderstand how capitalism and speculation work.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top