News   Jan 08, 2025
News Roundup for January 8, 2025
 362     1 
News   Jan 08, 2025
Framing the New Year
 503     0 
News   Jan 07, 2025
Galleria III Approaches Topping off at Dufferin and Dupont
 1.7K     3 

Westin Harbour Castle (?, ?, ?)

salsa said:
Someone in this thread mentioned that the hotel is currently having its rooms and hallways extensively renovated. For those of you who are calling for its complete obliteration (including myself), I don't see much hope of that happening if they are spending so much money trying to modernize it. Maybe in 50 years though!
Click to expand...

The existing owners have been modernizing the interiors. That may have been a part of the play to sell it but that's no guarantee that the new owners won't be buying it for its land value and density swapping potential.
 
Didn't they spend a boat load of money to renovate the Delta Chelsea hotel on Yonge and now have 4 tall towers proposed for it a few years later?
 
am29 said:
Didn't they spend a boat load of money to renovate the Delta Chelsea hotel on Yonge and now have 4 tall towers proposed for it a few years later?
Click to expand...
Yes but the 'life' of hotel rooms in decent hotel is between 8 - 10 years (apart from painting) and getting all the documentation together and actually permission to build and then get enough sales to actually do so is not quick so I would be amazed that anything will be happening to the old Delta Chelsea for many years yet.
 
MetroMan said:
There's no business case for a park here and to be honest, we don't need another park. There's plenty of park land along the water on that site. The building and its podium just need to be more porous like Pier 27 on the other side of the quay.

What I'd like to see is a density swap where the city grants high density for a pair of tall towers (matching the 1 Yonge Street redevelopment) on the north side on the conference land and shorter low rises with narrow podiums on the lake side to allow for views to the lake and easy pedestrian access.
Click to expand...

There would never be a "business case" for a park, as it doesnt generate any revenue - it would cost somebody something. I am suggesting that have parkland on the lakefront would be very desirable and perhaps there is a way of achieving it - maybe the city has to buy a portion or the developer gets to have additional density across the street but without a complete replacement of the cost of the loss on the waterfront site. Central Park would not exist today if New York hadn't taken dramatic steps to acquire the land it needed for the park. Nothing worthwhile is ever easy.
 
I'd be happy if they we're to build a new hotel on the convention lands which would alow them to keep the jobs and develop the old hotel lands with mid rise residential opening the area up to the waterfront and ferry terminal
 
Let's put it this way: nobody is going to spend a half billion dollars to operate a hotel.

That valuation is for the development potential of both sites. Building condos on the north side and leaving the hotel intact isn't going to pay for that investment. Both sites will have to be redeveloped to make it worth it for any investor.

Considering the numbers being thrown around, I'm now confident that we're going to see the existing buildings demolished and the land redeveloped.
 
With both sites a blank slate, I would expect that city planning will negotiate something similar to what was done with Pier 27. High rise on the north, low rise on the south, and a wide publicly accessible boardwalk/park corridor along the slip from Queens Quay to the lake.

To maximize land use and earnings, a developer may want to locate a pair of hotel/residential towers on the north site and low rise luxury condos on the south site. It makes sense that the north phase would go first to allow for the hotel to continue to operate while the new one is built, then move on to the south site to sell luxury condos with unobstructed views of the lake.
 
MetroMan said:
Let's put it this way: nobody is going to spend a half billion dollars to operate a hotel.

That valuation is for the development potential of both sites. Building condos on the north side and leaving the hotel intact isn't going to pay for that investment. Both sites will have to be redeveloped to make it worth it for any investor.

Considering the numbers being thrown around, I'm now confident that we're going to see the existing buildings demolished and the land redeveloped.
Click to expand...

That is if a purchaser is found for the $400 million price. Sounds optimistic. Full demolition will push it even higher. Midrises only if they are 40 storeys. Towers would be upward of 80 storey to the tune of a million and a half square feet of residential. Don't think you can do it without commercial which would cut down those numbers alot. Don't think anyone is going to spend more than half a billion to build condos on three acres.
 
I remember the Harbour Castle being the venue of choice for whatever 80s/90s Canadian music/radio conventions/weaselfests happened in town--I guess in our digital age, as goeth, so goeth...
 
Everyone here is saying.....knock it down, build a park, expropriate it, etc.
but at the end of the day no one is saying, exchange some of that waterfront land to the city, for no height limits on the adjacent convention centre lot?
When someone pays 400 million, that's what it may take, ...haha you cant have your cake and eat it too
 
Last edited:
I don't see any need for a park when the ferry terminal is right beside it. Just a continuation of the waterfront promenade would be enough in my mind.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Everyone here is saying.....knock it down, build a park, expropriate it, etc.
but at the end of the day no one is saying, exchange some of that waterfront land to the city, for no height limits on the adjacent convention centre lot?
When someone pays 400 million, that's what it may take, ...haha you cant have your cake and eat it too
Click to expand...
I'd be happy if the City traded no height limits on the convention centre lot across the street, for total demolition of the hotel and replacement with something low-rise, incorporating a decent amount of public space and reconfigured access to a new ferry terminal. I mean, the hotel has to be one of the worst buildings in Toronto, which is saying a lot.
 
Jacob Laponointe said:
As a person that uses that stretch of Martin Goodman for running, I say level the whole thing. I think this building is an abomination to the current urban context of the area, especially with the suburban assault vehicles cutting pedestrians off to enter the parkade.

As far as the conference centre, that would be an excellent site for a landmark office/residential or mixed use building. There is a potential to connect the building to Queen Quay Station as well.
Click to expand...

That can be said about all buildings south of QQ between Yonge and Bathurst.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top