Toronto Concord Canada House | 231.97m | 74s | Concord Adex | Arcadis

10 Dundas East doesn't have 1000 people living in it. Not to mention all the other condo dwellers in Cityplace.
Plus 10 Dundas has the Eaton Centre to compete with (or does it provide spillover? I guess I'm not sure if it's an advantage or a hindrance) and it just looks so uninviting I don't think many people make it their destination location.
 
I could see a strong podium concept like Maple Leaf Square here, with office space instead of hotels and a couple levels of retail. Cityplace has been hit and miss (mostly miss early on) but here's a perfect opportunity to anchor the entire development with a solid centre piece.
 
I think the area could definitely use more retail and entertainment zoning. With Spadina frontage, this would be a good place to put it. The site is quite small though - a great deal smaller than Maple Leaf Square. I think you'd need a bigger site to comfortably put two 60's towers on it.
 
I wonder if the original signature tower design will be used as inspiration for the new towers?

toronto-sizematters.jpg
 
I would think for a signature tower they would want to go for height to offer spectacular views. Isn't the 40 story Harbourfront tower south of it?
 
taal said:
Simple ... it's not 10 floors of retail ... its 10 floors of commercial space i.e. offices.
Maybe there will be retail at grade.

That's my guess at least.
Click to expand...

Thats correct. Retail would be included in the mix.

I really do hope that Concord will keep pushing the City for these 10 floors of commercial space, as more workers in Cityplace will definitely help the retail develop in all of the other buildings.
 
DaninToronto said:
I would think for a signature tower they would want to go for height to offer spectacular views. Isn't the 40 story Harbourfront tower south of it?
Click to expand...

The name Signature is so old now that there is no guarantee that it will be used when they get around to marketing the complex.

42
 
Peepers said:
^Lets hope not. Looks like a pretty limp design to me :p
Click to expand...

LIMP design??? HAHAHA ... I got that!!! That is a very phallic building on its side like that!!:rolleyes:


Truth is , what was "Signature " in 2003, would be sub standard now.... 900 to 1000 ft, would be signature.... 700 would be acceptable.... - 650... would be unforgivable!!!!
 
Where did the 69s come from? just a rumour or does it have a credible source?
Click to expand...

Signature was being actively marketed at the sales centre, complete with model, when it was the last site left east of Spadina. They changed their minds and decided to develop the lands west of Spadina first and then come back to it as the final tower.
 
jetsbackincanada said:
Truth is , what was "Signature " in 2003, would be sub standard now.... 900 to 1000 ft, would be signature.... 700 would be acceptable.... - 650... would be unforgivable!!!!
Click to expand...
....and, you know, what it actually looks like in terms of design and not just height.

Right?
 
This one needs more hard information before it can be discussed in full. One would not want to engage in an fallacies or untruths regarding the imminent erection of this unfertile project.
 
Ya know...

We were discussing height here,, yes design is important, but height truly is a statement maker... 1 St Thomas as great as it is, Is not a signature tower... 10 YORK, regardless of its cladding and shape, will be "signature" because its among the 10 tallest towers, and its location!!!

I love skylines, and skyscrapers... I will not apologize for that, Sorry I dont want to debate the spandrel ad nauseum, or criticize every project that comes along, to make myself feel important.
This forum is renowned for rude and elitist commentary. Many people are driven away by this.
I will not be sorry!
I am capable of loving my city as much as all you critics do, and my opinion is worth about the exact same as all of yours! :rolleyes:

I love great architecture, but I also realize that, along with everything else in this world, we live in a disposable, pre assembled, paint by numbers world. False facades, and crappy materials, are the norm, not the exception.
If in trade, we can fight sprawl and congestion, by offering homes to people of lower to middle incomes, as well as the rich ? That is a win!
Cityplace is a unilateral success, in terms of a model for a sustainable urban center.
Thousands, have access to that lifestyle. How is that bad?
If they were all 1 St Thomas, we would have only upper class, and thereby very little growth, at least when compared to what is happening know!

I applaud the growth and vision of Toronto.

Yes, Signature Tower therefore will need to be 850+ feet in order to be signature.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top