Toronto Pinnacle One Yonge | 345.5m | 105s | Pinnacle | Hariri Pontarini

AlbertC said:
Thanks for sharing those, there's definitely some new renderings in there. This image showing the massing density structures in the area with development potential of LCBO site is especially striking.


http://www.flickr.com/photos/roxxstarr/8769014403/
Click to expand...

The tallest tower shown on the LCBO lands looks to be in line with the rumoured 75 floors we have known of for a while now.
 
RC8 said:
If there is one value which we absolutely must embrace in the built-form we choose to build now, in my opinion, it is dynamism and potential for future re-purposing. This, I believe, necessarily involves building at scales that are relatively independent from all modes of motorised transport and that do not require massive investments for change or maintenance. In the long term, we basically can't go wrong if we adhere to the principle of building dynamic people-friendly communities.
Click to expand...

"dynamic people-friendly communities" is just a complete abuse of the english language. Nobody is against that goal; the issue is there is no agreement on what it means.

There is absolutely zero evidence to suggest a midrise building is any more 'adaptable' to anything than a high or low rise. Structurally, I don't think there's any difference between midrise and highrise buildings in Toronto anyhow outside of floorcount. Adaptability is more a product of builder provisions in terms of things like knock out walls. And adapt to what, exactly? No residential structure in Canada will ever get converted to industrial uses. Even the original industrial warehouses which have been converted to residential or commercial would make terrible industrial spaces today.
 
Just a reminder about the public meeting held tomorrow on the Lower Yonge Precinct planning. Details above and at Waterfront Toronto's website.
 
Last edited:
Nice rendering, gives a great sense of this area could pretty much become an extension of downtown. Wish they could have done another version with 55 and 65 Harbour Square and Westin Harbour Castle razed with a park in their places.
 
my one major concern is that they seem to have no interest with reconnecting harbor street with lakeshore east again. it just sort of... ends.
 
Last edited:
Another skyline visualization, with appearances from Mirvish, 156 & 151 Front and the Entertainment District, among others (no Oxford though):
O5oXmiG.jpg
 
innsertnamehere said:
my one major concern is that they seem to have no interest with reconnecting harbor street with lakeshore east again. it just sort of... ends.
Click to expand...

That would take place where the Loblaws parking lot is now. Since the Loblaws lands are not in play at the moment, there's nothing speculated for that site in the document. Only properties where redevelopment is actively being explored have possible new buildings pictured on them.

42
 
So we're creating a jog in Lake Shore? I'm not sure if I understand this Harbor Street extension. Harbor Street is not really a street, more like a name for a 400m portion of Lake Shore Blvd. I find it odd that we'd extend it and remove the existing connection to Lake Shore, and confusing that the name Harbor St exists for such a small portion of Lake Shore at all. If we wanna create a new street, I'm all for it, but rerouting Eastbound traffic on Lake shore through this new portion doesn't make any sense.. Especially if it's a one way with heavy traffic.

Why not keep the existing connection with Lake Shore and create a new pedestrian friendly street built with stone a la West Don Lands.
 
Jaye101 said:
So we're creating a jog in Lake Shore? I'm not sure if I understand this Harbor Street extension. Harbor Street is not really a street, more like a name for a 400m portion of Lake Shore Blvd. I find it odd that we'd extend it and remove the existing connection to Lake Shore, and confusing that the name Harbor St exists for such a small portion of Lake Shore at all. If we wanna create a new street, I'm all for it, but rerouting Eastbound traffic on Lake shore through this new portion doesn't make any sense.. Especially if it's a one way with heavy traffic.

Why not keep the existing connection with Lake Shore and create a new pedestrian friendly street built with stone a la West Don Lands.
Click to expand...

You mean the heavy traffic from the off-ramp on to Harbour Street? The city is moving that off-ramp back. Too lazy to look at the plans now and I can't remember where the traffic will merge (probably still at Harbour), but it will be before York Street, and there will be a light there. As is the cars come barreling down from the Gardiner like a waterslide and keep speeding through Yonge til they get to Lakeshore. The ramp demolition will change that. Harbour street will be more for local access than the artery it is now with the merging of Harbour and Lakeshore east of Yonge severed and an additional light at York for cars coming off the Gardiner.
 
Jaye is talking about the eastward extension of Harbour past Yonge.

I'm looking forward to it. I'm not worried that Eastbound traffic will be separated from westbound Lake Shore for longer. I don't see what the big deal is. It may confuse some people at first, but people adapt.

Jaye, the new Harbour extension will merge back into old eastbound Lake Shore somewhere around where Loblaw's parking deck is now.

Lansdude, in regard to the new Gardiner offramp, I don't think they can get going on that soon enough. No idea when it's budgeted yet, but they should be starting to build the new Simcoe ramp as soon as they've got the engineering done as far as I'm concerned. That circular ramp needs to come down to create a usable central park for when WPP III and 10 York are completed. We have a new serious district emerging here, but it won't feel like one until it has that ramp and park reworked.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top