Deadpool X
Senior Member
Gross Floor Area is still the same even after this large height increase.
Toronto Chelsea Green (was 33 Gerrard) | 297.25m | 90s | Great Eagle | a—A
- Thread starter markel
- Start date
Koops65
Senior Member
cd concept
Senior Member
Looking at the Koops flyby and rendering up above. I think tower B should trade places with tower A. Giving more breathing space between the two towers and the the Aura Tower just a thought.
LemonCondo
Active Member
Forgive me for my lack of knowledge of how things work around here, but are we getting close to closing the Dundas > College PATH gap with a string of projects here?
Atrium > Panda > 17 Elm > 18 Elm > Chelsea Green > AURA
If there is not a concrete plan to have all of these link up it will be quite annoying to do it after the fact.
Atrium > Panda > 17 Elm > 18 Elm > Chelsea Green > AURA
If there is not a concrete plan to have all of these link up it will be quite annoying to do it after the fact.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Panda has knockout panels on P1 or P2, but no rough in for a connection beyond that.
Northern Light
Superstar
For further clarity, a Path Extension here is identified as a medium-term priority of the City, which is why the knock-out panels exist in Panda.
I would expect provisions for further extension in other developments, where appropriate, but there is no near-term implementation plan or funding.
I would expect provisions for further extension in other developments, where appropriate, but there is no near-term implementation plan or funding.
Koops65
Senior Member
Thread title hasn't been updated yet...
FormerTorontonianBackInTO
New Member
The towers look nice and clean but the ground realm facade is unfortunately typical Architects Alliance - sterile, soulless, and poorly articulated sheets of glass. As much I love density, from an architectural perspective, I prefer the character of the existing building - the current ground realm (espeically the Gerrard St frontage) isn't beautiful but it still has so much more personality than this.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
It would be ridiculous to suggest adding a Gerrard subway stop with all this insane density to come by the end of the decade. The PATH should have a more prominent place here with Planning given all this massive development, especially on the west side from Elm St.to College station for winter and inclement weather. Perhaps PATH marked entrances at the south & north Gerrard St. buildings for those living in the tall towers on the east side.
Northern Light
Superstar
Huh?
To whom are you responding with this? I don't see any mention of such an idea in the last 2 pages.
It's not proposed, and it's not happening.
The south end of the station box of College station is 123M north of Gerrard Street. That's not long enough to fit a TTC subway platform.
While the City has planned at a high-level for the Path to run from the Atrium to this site, in the medium term, I don't see high value in it. There is no near-term market for vibrant underground retail north of Panda, and whether or not Panda can fill the space it has is an open question.
The re-do of Yonge Street will create significantly more and better space of pedestrians, and I think that's where the priority lies in the near term.
Koops65
Senior Member
innsertnamehere
Superstar
the pedestrian volumes coming out of all the development at Yonge / Gerrard may necessesitate some sort of PATH connection.. Even with the Yonge street reconstruction the street is just going to be a zoo of pedestrians.
isaidso
Senior Member
Speaking of pedestrian volumes, Yonge will need to be re-designed as a 2 lane road with substantially wider sidewalks, sooner rather than later. It's not like it's being used as a 4 lane road anyway. The outer lanes are full of drivers who use it as a parking spot.
