Breaking free of ‘podiumism’

[M II A II R II K]

Breaking free of ‘podiumism’


Mar. 24, 2011

By JOHN BENTLEY MAYS

Read More: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...ys/breaking-free-of-podiumism/article1954978/


If you really want to get Brad Lamb’s goat, show him a high-rise podium. The celebrity Toronto realtor and condominium developer hates podiums so much he’s even invented a word for Hogtown’s affliction by them. It’s podiumism. “There’s tremendous pressure from the planning department to create podiumism,†Mr. Lamb told me last week at his corporate headquarters on King Street West. “You have to build a podium to your lot line, then you do a 10- or 20-foot setback, then you build a little more tower, then you do another setback. It creates the kind of wedding-cake architecture that exists in this city [and] that drives me mad.â€

In fairness to the city planners Mr. Lamb complains about, it’s worth remembering the reasons why tall-building podiums and set-back towers are popular among the public defenders of high-density downtowns such as the one Toronto’s got. Pushed out to the sidewalk, multistorey platforms provide strong definition of the streetscape at grade. The stepping-back of the tower from this concentrated mass at the bottom allows light and air to descend to the street, thus preventing canyon-like shadow from gathering thick in the intervals between buildings. Though the actual things that get built according to such principles are rarely elegant or exciting, they do represent some success at keeping developers from putting up towers that loom over and darken the streets below.

That said, there are other ways to put residential density into the downtown core, and, for a new, interesting $100-million development in the theatre district of King Street West, Mr. Lamb has picked one. The strategy involves raising a very tall, slender, nearly podium-free condominium tower at the rear of its small, south-facing site, and planting a tiny urban park, with a fountain and benches for relaxing, between the tower and the sidewalk. “We got a lot of push-back from the planning department,†Mr. Lamb said. “But you don’t have to build a building right out to the street. What’s wrong with having some relief every now and then? A place where people can sit down for a minute, have a chat or have a sandwich, contemplate their navels, whatever?†For my part, I can’t think of anything wrong with having such an open spot in the core, so long as it’s set down in our midst with great care.

.....

 

[M II A II R II K]

Of Parks, Podiums and Penumbras: How Density Changes Development


April 12, 2011

By Ryan Donahue

Read More: http://cityparksblog.org/2011/04/12/of-parks-podiums-and-penumbras-how-density-changes-development/


Cities that increase density by building skywards can inadvertently end up with impersonal streetscapes defined by monotonous walls of glass and concrete. Toronto has avoided the issue of dark, canyon-like streetscapes by mandating that buildings offer a human-scale street presence. Most large buildings are composed of a “podium” base, with towers receding from the street in steps as they grow upwards, allowing sunlight to filter through. But one developer, Brad Lamb, is tired of the monotonous wedding-cake aesthetic caused by codes that encourage “podiumism.”

He sees parks as a way to increase density without sacrificing beauty and creativity. This is a somewhat of a twist on the usual tension between density and open space, in which cities have to force developers to include parks as an offset to residential and commercial projects (in a future article, we’ll discuss Seattle’s Green Factor codes, which require new developments in dense areas to provide publicly accessible and visible landscaping). In Toronto, Lamb wants to build a slender 47-story residential tower and replace the podium space of other towers with a tiny park (the entire lot is only 62 by 200 feet). The building is between two historic buildings and the park would feature a lawn, benches, and a fountain. His plans, though, face some opposition from city planners. This is certainly not the first time that open space and density have struggled to coexist.

San Francisco’s Proposition K, otherwise known as the Sunlight Ordinance, was the source of a recent clash between parks advocates and proponents of dense, transit-oriented city living. Passed in 1984, the ordinance bans the development of any building over forty feet that would cast a shadow on an existing park. The Sunlight Ordinance halted the development of a group of residential towers, part of the high-profile remake of the Transbay Transit Center, when it was discovered that two of the towers would cast a shadow on nearby parks. The shadows would have fallen on St. Mary’s and Portsmouth Squares for an hour a day in the spring and fall, and on Justin Herman Plaza for an hour around lunchtime in the middle of winter.

.....



Justin Herman Plaza, San Francisco. Credit: Kenneth Lu (Flickr Feed)

 

[junctionist]

I'm assuming that Theatre Park showcases Lamb's vision. The park might be good change of pace next to a landmark like the Royal Alex, where people can relax and socialize before or after a show. If there's a cafe or restaurant on the ground floor of the building with a patio in the park, it would be a great alternative to the common podium. Theatre Park is an exceptional circumstance being next to such a prominent cultural landmark; otherwise, podiums maintain the traditional scale and relationship of buildings to the street, which has a definite appeal.

Nevertheless, circumstances arise where creativity can result in more sophisticated city-building than the common practice, podiums in this case. If the majority of new projects adopted this approach unscrupulously, however, streetscapes would become more inconsistent and chaotic, eroding a style of city-building that may be as old as this city itself.

 

[Tewder]

Isn't the issue really that of streetwalls and how we want to define them? Whether it is a podium or a tower what really matters is how the facade meets the street... and I would agree that while Theatre Park makes good use of its location I am happy it will be a nice exception rather than a rule that if unchecked might loosen the fabric of tight-knit urban streets. With High Park, the ravine system, the waterfront and several inner-city parks people in Toronto have no shortage of access to open space.

 

[Redroom Studios]

I'm totally with Lamb on this one... podium bases rarely do what they claim to do and so many of the ones in Toronto are just plain ugly. Having said that I think he's over-stated his point about this city being filled with wedding cake architecture. The only example of that is the Hyatt on King West and its design was purposefully so rather than in response to city building codes requiring podiums. If anything the city is becoming too full with boxy point towers. I think the intent of the building code to maintain the continuity of street fronts is a good idea but it doesnt apply in every situation. So many times we end up with a block long glass wall with an empty space inside. (think Murano!) That does nothing for the street life. I think the proposed Theatre Park development should go ahead as it has been proposed, its a really creative way to use that narrow piece of land.