Mongo
Senior Member
From the above report:
|
|
|
East Bayfront: Bayside (Waterfront Toronto/Hines/Tridel, Pelli Clark Pelli et al)
- Thread starter Mike in TO
- Start date
greenleaf
Senior Member
In case anyone else was wondering who "Hines" is (from pdf posted by AoD):
Hines Canada Management Company ULC (Hines or the Development Partner) is a wholly owned subsidiary of the US-based Hines organization, a large private development company. The parent corporation currently has assets over $US 220 billion under management and has acquired or developed over 1,000 properties world-wide over the past 50 years. For the Bayside project, WT believes Hines has the vision, experience and resources to complete this large-scale project and meet the high expectations for the Bayside Lands.
Hines has retained the architectural firm Pelli Clark Pelli which has designed several landmark buildings internationally, supported by Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Khun Architects, which has prepared waterfront development schemes in several U.S. cities.
Hines’ local consultants include Adamson Associates Architects, BA Transportation Group, Lord Cultural Resources, JC Williams Retail Consulting and DTZ Barnicke Retail Brokerage.
----
The closest approximate project to this one that Hines is doing is Center Centre DC, in Washington DC, which also sits on a 10 acre parcel. There's a video of that project here (cool terracing in the inner courtyard): http://www.citycenterdc.com
Pelli Clark Pelli - http://www.pcparch.com
Adamson Associates Architect - http://www.adamson-associates.com/
Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Khun Architects - http://www.eekarchitects.com - have recently worked on NYC's waterfront with their Battery Park City plan.
Hines Canada Management Company ULC (Hines or the Development Partner) is a wholly owned subsidiary of the US-based Hines organization, a large private development company. The parent corporation currently has assets over $US 220 billion under management and has acquired or developed over 1,000 properties world-wide over the past 50 years. For the Bayside project, WT believes Hines has the vision, experience and resources to complete this large-scale project and meet the high expectations for the Bayside Lands.
Hines has retained the architectural firm Pelli Clark Pelli which has designed several landmark buildings internationally, supported by Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Khun Architects, which has prepared waterfront development schemes in several U.S. cities.
Hines’ local consultants include Adamson Associates Architects, BA Transportation Group, Lord Cultural Resources, JC Williams Retail Consulting and DTZ Barnicke Retail Brokerage.
----
The closest approximate project to this one that Hines is doing is Center Centre DC, in Washington DC, which also sits on a 10 acre parcel. There's a video of that project here (cool terracing in the inner courtyard): http://www.citycenterdc.com
Pelli Clark Pelli - http://www.pcparch.com
Adamson Associates Architect - http://www.adamson-associates.com/
Ehrenkrantz Eckstut & Khun Architects - http://www.eekarchitects.com - have recently worked on NYC's waterfront with their Battery Park City plan.
Last edited:
Filip
Senior Member
I'm very excited to see some Pelli in Toronto. As a kid he was my favourite architect.
Hines always had very thought out designs - I remember their proposal for an office building in Montreal which was striking in its simplicity and pure modernism.
Hines always had very thought out designs - I remember their proposal for an office building in Montreal which was striking in its simplicity and pure modernism.
Thanks for such a helpful summary of the major players Greenleaf!
42
42
lead82
Senior Member
This development looks like a great fit for the area and the density and mixed use is what WT is looking for. I hope they approve this development.
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 19,063
- Reaction score
- 26,628
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
I see that the TTC streetcar line on QQ EAst looks like it will not appear for quite a while...
Waterfront Toronto Obligations
WT is required to use reasonable commercial efforts to ensure that sufficient public transit capacity (ie buses) is available to Bayside by July, 2013 and that Light Rail Transit (LRT) is operational by the end of 2018. Otherwise, WT is obliged to waive the requirement of Hines of developing the office parcels at C1 and C2 in advance of the balance of the residential buildings.
The original plan was for "Transit First" and for it to be finished in 2011/12. I bet the folks at Corus and at the future George Brown site are not going to be happy if it is postponed until 2018. It will be fun to see how the TTC expects to get buses to Union Station - the EA they had clearly showed it was almost impossible which is why the LRT was selected.
Waterfront Toronto Obligations
WT is required to use reasonable commercial efforts to ensure that sufficient public transit capacity (ie buses) is available to Bayside by July, 2013 and that Light Rail Transit (LRT) is operational by the end of 2018. Otherwise, WT is obliged to waive the requirement of Hines of developing the office parcels at C1 and C2 in advance of the balance of the residential buildings.
The original plan was for "Transit First" and for it to be finished in 2011/12. I bet the folks at Corus and at the future George Brown site are not going to be happy if it is postponed until 2018. It will be fun to see how the TTC expects to get buses to Union Station - the EA they had clearly showed it was almost impossible which is why the LRT was selected.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
I have some mild concerns in the way the proposals deviated from the precint plan, particularly in a) the internal street arrangements appears to be a lot less legible if not downright convoluted and b) Aitkin Place park no longer appears to be a standalone entity but almost like an extension of Parcel R6/7. Have to wait for more info for a better assessment.
Original EBF Precinct Plan
http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/widgets_document/download-document/piece_id/1344/file_number/0
AoD
Original EBF Precinct Plan
http://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/widgets_document/download-document/piece_id/1344/file_number/0
AoD
greenleaf
Senior Member
I think the two dead end streets in this new plan are really awkward. Why doesn't the street loop though in the new plan with pedestrian throughways to the waterfront? That seems like it would be better for pedestrians, cars, and then retailers too.
taal
Senior Member
Not sure what you're seeing ... they're not dead end at all ... they're dead end for cars only, pedestrians can walk right to the water ... across ... and up the other street. I'm pretty sure this is the way it was in the original plan as well.
The bit about the LRT is concerning ... but, at the very, all it says is they do not have to build the office first / at the same time ... at the very least they can't convert to residential use. So, eventually, we'll see office user there.
The bit about the LRT is concerning ... but, at the very, all it says is they do not have to build the office first / at the same time ... at the very least they can't convert to residential use. So, eventually, we'll see office user there.
greenleaf
Senior Member
I guess I am echoing what AoD said earlier. Access to Aitken Place park seems limited; it's not noticable from either road leading in to the area, and even from Queen's Quay it looks limited for Pedestrians as well. There might be "eyes on the street" onto the park from the buildings, but no "eyes from the street" for people going through the area.
MSherry
New Member
Hey UT.
I've been following the forum for a while now and just saw this thread and am very glad that the East Bayfront site is getting some attention because I have a question which I think needs to be addressed - where has the public process been in all of this?
This is PRIMO land and for the public to have so little information on what 's going on with everything is worrying. I'm aware that certain information needs to be kept under wraps - Duh! But how about seeing the plans? Weren't several proponents asked to submit proposals? Who's deciding on who wins the contract - WT? Are the public not allowed to chime in on what THEY would like seen done on the site?
Seems very odd the public are not going to be able to see what options for the site were submitted and instead are just going to be TOLD what's going to be built there by a small group of people. This IS city owned land, is it not?
Can ANYONE shed some light on this? Surely we should have AT LEAST seen the DESIGNS by now - does anybody else not find this odd?!
I've been following the forum for a while now and just saw this thread and am very glad that the East Bayfront site is getting some attention because I have a question which I think needs to be addressed - where has the public process been in all of this?
This is PRIMO land and for the public to have so little information on what 's going on with everything is worrying. I'm aware that certain information needs to be kept under wraps - Duh! But how about seeing the plans? Weren't several proponents asked to submit proposals? Who's deciding on who wins the contract - WT? Are the public not allowed to chime in on what THEY would like seen done on the site?
Seems very odd the public are not going to be able to see what options for the site were submitted and instead are just going to be TOLD what's going to be built there by a small group of people. This IS city owned land, is it not?
Can ANYONE shed some light on this? Surely we should have AT LEAST seen the DESIGNS by now - does anybody else not find this odd?!
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
It could very well be a valid point, which has previously been raised in this very thread. What I do also find odd though is why would someone go about setting up another account to make essentially the same posting. You know, sockpuppeting is more or less a bannable offense on UT.
AoD
AoD
taal
Senior Member
Haven't we seen a few of the designs for other waterfront land ... river city ?
Filip
Senior Member
Well it's the TTC after all... I mean look at it from their perspective.. It's more important to build streetcars on suburban arterials so that they can give a big F YOU to the subway system.. Jeez, pretty obvious observation, no?
taal
Senior Member
Yes and no, the bit about the DRL ... sure ... although it seems they're pushing that as well now.
There's nothing in this area yet, we'll building transit to accommodate future growth ... if I recall a lot of us were pretty upset about the VCC expansion ... in some ways, this is similar no? This might be further ahead in planning ...
Anyway, I think there's an issue of money as well, those other projects are being funded partly from the provincial government ... not this, not directly at least.