alenka
New Member
Well, not that much difference in my opinion. Strictly speaking there is only one condo building on the corner of Yonge and Bloor, and there already was a discussion at some point what is or is not Yorkville, now we are going to be splitting hairs about what is or is not Bloor and Yonge. If you look at the condos on one the adjacent street Charles St from Jarvis to Yonge the situation with visitor parking is like that:
X2 - has visitor parking, 71 Charles also has few spots. Casa condominium 33 Charles St. East has extensive visitor parking, 45 Charles St. (Chaz) does not have visitor parking but it has a driveway where cars can pose for deliveries and pick ups.
The problem with 1 Bloor St. is that even deliveries are a problem and food delivery, for example, is a reality of modern life and convenience. I used to live in Manhattan for a long time and most recently Time square area. It was the tallest condo on the West side, and it is well known what parking and driving is like in Times Sq. Even there there was an arrangement for delivery vehicles to park and a special delivery elevator for these purposes. Not only visitor parking but even deliveries are a problem at 1 Bloor. And still Bloor and Yonge is not as populated and as expensive as Manhattan.
Also, even though the building was a bit shorter than 1 Bloor, they had a separate set of 3 elevators elevators for floors 1-35 and 3 elevators for the upper part of the building, + 1 elevator for deliveries and staff + 1 moving elevator. You never had to wait for an elevator. They also have an extensive space at the ground floor consisting of an adequate size lobby, 2 sets of elevators with separate lobbies, mail room for numerous parcels and deliveries, and laundry and dry cleaning drop off and pick up. The reason I am mentionning the New York condo is this.
First of all, when I was purchasing 1 Bloor condo nobody has worn me that Great Gulf had no prior experience with tall buildings. Just the opposite, the builder's portfolio was praised. If I was told that this was sort of an experiment, a learning experience for them - it would have been a different story. Why use this excuse now? It should have been disclosed in the sales office. The second reason goes back to planning. Very tall buildings exist for a very long time. No need to go very far - Toronto, CN tower, New York, and the rest of the world. Even if Great Gulf did not have experience, they could have studied architecture or rather functioning of tall residential buildings. And it is sort of common sense that tall buildings equal a large number of people coming and going, ordering things, getting deliveries, waiting in the lobby with suitcases etc - all this requires space. And it should not feel like a crowded hotel, which means even more space and thoughtful layout of common areas. I somehow believe that they have known this or should have known...I find it a poor excuse that they did not have experience, they are a good builder after all.
I think that there should be at least some short-term free visitor parking, may be 2-4 hours, at least for pick ups and deliveries, etc. For resident's convenience.
Last edited:
