Toronto 2400 Dundas West | 142.8m | 42s | Fora | Giannone Petricone

SubHuman said:
I don't know how the prospective timing of the two projects lines up, but it would be a little annoying if the FreshCo here and the nearby Loblaws
https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threa...38s-choice-properties-hariri-pontarini.27293/
were to simultaneously disappear for two or three years before their replacements opened.
Click to expand...
This would most likely be phased as well to keep the grocer open in its current location while building the new grocer spot on level 2 of the North building.

Mrgeosim said:
Wow I am astounded at how thoughtful the developers are being for this true gem of a location. I absolutely love the tall red tower to the south. It is elegant and modern, yet it draws inspiration from the neighbourhood's industrial past. This is exactly what sort of building should be built here. I just wish the developers of the Giraffe building and Loblows site see this and know what they should be aiming for.

The green building is nice as well, but it just feels out of place, both in the neighbourhood and in juxtaposition to the red tower. The geometry of it fits the location wonderfully, and I even think the balcony design could work but the materiality needs to change in my opinion. I appreciate the boldness of architect, but the green and yellow cladding makes it feel cheap and disposable, a contrast to the neighboring tower, which exudes a sense of permanence.
Click to expand...

formerTorontonian said:
Respectfully, this city is dying for some boldness, while that green and yellow can't possibly look any cheaper than the Toronto standard grey spandrel. Ultimately I don't think that it's the color but the quality of the materials that determines whether a building looks cheap (ie. texture or lack thereof). Also, personally, I would pay a premium to live in a bright colored building, although I do recognize that I'm probably in the minority on this one
Click to expand...
The idea behind the colours seem to be similar to a forest with "fluttering" and the South taller tower a strong stance like tree trunk and verticality of a trees.

The colours may be bold, but I do think we need some of that. If you look at that winter shot, it makes the cold feel a bit warmer and bright, compared to the cold blah blue/grey glass of most DT towers.
 
tstormers said:
This would most likely be phased as well to keep the grocer open in its current location while building the new grocer spot on level 2 of the North building.
Click to expand...
This also came up. The plan is for a single excavation and build across the entire site, no phasing. The grocery store would be closed during construction. Fora also noted that the new grocery store would remain under the Empire Company banner, but no guarantee it remains a FreshCo.
 
pesto said:
It would have been nice if the abandoned building to the north was incorporated into this development somehow.
Click to expand...
The entire triangle between Dundas and the tracks will eventually be developed, and I think it would also be a great idea to incorporate a new tunnel at the north end of the station platforms into that development. There are a handful of plots on the east side of the tracks which will likely be developed as well, although probably not to the same intensity as the west side. It's a matter of when, not if.
 
I feel as though diligent UTers have given us all the goods here.

@ProjectEnd , @carrythezero and @smably have done a fine job bringing us links, renders, facts and details from the public meeting.

As such, I'm not going to muddle though the Application that is now into the City, the docs for which are public, in the middle of the night; but I will drop the link here.

app.toronto.ca

Application Details

app.toronto.ca app.toronto.ca
 
I wonder if this development at all changes the possibility of a new Western platform to service the Milton Line.
 
The green tower looks like it is covered in moss.

There must be pressure to buy the block across the street now.

It's not shaping up as an attractive neighbourhood. Not that that side is now.
SubHuman said:
Is pigeon poop considered to be contamination?
View attachment 457393

BTW, a 1,000 square m public park, if it was roughly square in shape, would measure about 32 m (slightly over 100 feet) on each side, so really more of a smallish parkette than a park, but I suppose it would be better than nothing.
Click to expand...
No doubt the parkette is a dog bathroom. Will pigeons be welcome?
 
Revisions to this one in a June '24 resubmission:

1718816462496.png


1718816489738.png


1718816221504.png

1718816242128.png


****

1718816307825.png

1718816328669.png

1718816377112.png

1718816391961.png


@Paclo
 

Attachments

  • 1718816358054.png
    1718816358054.png
    1 MB · Views: 56
87 is good, 115 is acceptable, 124 is starting to get crazy. But on city-wide average, we're so deep in the shit (140, 150, 160, 170 per unit) that these seem perfectly fine on the face of it.
 
Resubmitted with the following stat changes:
  • Total vehicular parking decreased from 172 to 155
  • Total bicycle parking increased from 1373 to 1394
  • Unit Mix & GFA redistribution
As well as the following technical revisions:
1729282990977.png

1729283009182.png


No new renderings.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top