Toronto Ïce Condominiums at York Centre | 234.07m | 67s | Lanterra | a—A

Podiums

Just a quick question from a neophyte: why, on so many podiums in Toronto, is the ground floor retail not flush to the sidwalk? There always seems to be some sort of overhang (not sure of the proper terminology!), or the storefront is recessed. There are many hideous examples on Bay, but it seems to be cropping up more and more, as evidenced by Aura and this project. You don't see it on other major, successful shopping streets, such as Bloor or Michigan Avenue (or Queen St. for that matter), and it would seem to me it diminishes engagement with the street and pedestrians. I would also think retailers wouldn't love it as their merchandising displays are not as visible.

Am I missing something or do you agree?
 
ProjectEnd said:
Spy Shots of the Podium Model...

2417419473_ca27bed568_o.jpg
Click to expand...

This is exactly what Toronto needs, an imaginative ground level that's not your typical boxy podium. Thanks for the shot, now everyone knows what I was talking about earlier about swiss cheese and why I was raving about the podium!
 
Just a quick question from a neophyte: why, on so many podiums in Toronto, is the ground floor retail not flush to the sidwalk? There always seems to be some sort of overhang (not sure of the proper terminology!), or the storefront is recessed.
Click to expand...

The city is pushing to have "weather protection" in most new developments in Toronto. Supposedly it will help to enhance the pedestrian realm due to our weather patterns here in the big smoke. While I agree rain and snow can make walking less then pleasent, the impacts on retail can be negative depending on how the weather protection is handled (pillars are terrible, a simple overhang can be okay).
 
Wow, that podium is very Alsop in a few ways: the colour, the organic shape, and the overall cleaver playfulness. Big jump for Aa. I wonder if he had a hand in it or it is just Alsop inspired. It also makes me also curious if Aa hired any people from Alsop's disbanded TO office. Maybe Alsop, or at least Alsop(-ian) style, will play a big part in TO after all.
The design is really clever the playing off the current trend of podium and point tower. Should be a good addition for an area increasingly being dominated by the 3 to 10 story podiums.
Kudos to Architects anonymous.;)
 
I have no idea, from that pictures (and thanks by the way) how that will look at the pedestrian level (which is how everyone will view it).
 
Mike in TO said:
The city is pushing to have "weather protection" in most new developments in Toronto. Supposedly it will help to enhance the pedestrian realm due to our weather patterns here in the big smoke. While I agree rain and snow can make walking less then pleasent, the impacts on retail can be negative depending on how the weather protection is handled (pillars are terrible, a simple overhang can be okay).
Click to expand...

In theory this seems like a good idea but too often the commercial tenants/owners fill up "their" overhang areas with stuff like tables (for restaurants/bars) or "junk" for merchants. It is not easy to actually use these sheltered areas! (The block on north side of King just west of Church is a good - or bad - example.)
 
Mongo: you are correct, it was a typo...160,000 m/sq

Canuck: You are also correct, it is Infinity Phase II not Optima.


Furthermore, in response to the general 'Alsop-ishness' of the design...

It was said that Clews was essentially given 'carte-blanche' with this design so 16 York could be more representative of his personal philosophy than past projects. Also, it should be noted that the office tower as-presented is little more than a massing model and is not what will eventually be there.
 
balmoral said:
Am I missing something or do you agree?
Click to expand...

I agree completely. The retail spaces being built in most new buildings are quite puny, pathetic, and monotonous, if they can be seen at all due to the precast pillars and mingy awnings. Perhaps the 16 York complex will have better street retail, though, since they are giving their podium considerable attention.
 
Mike in TO said:
The city is pushing to have "weather protection" in most new developments in Toronto. Supposedly it will help to enhance the pedestrian realm due to our weather patterns here in the big smoke. While I agree rain and snow can make walking less then pleasent, the impacts on retail can be negative depending on how the weather protection is handled (pillars are terrible, a simple overhang can be okay).
Click to expand...
IMO, the city should leave the weather protection to the individual tenants and owners. Each store having its own awning is so much more attractive than an oppressive arcade hiding all the storefronts. This kind of weather protection seems to be a growing trend in planning circles and it's one I don't like. The way the Met towers on Carleton did it is far superior.
 
The awnings on the Met are better than most on Bay or elsewhere that are supported by pillars, but not the best. They do not extend too far from the building and there is too much of a gap between each pane of glass which negates some of the weather protection. The awnings at John Frank Place on Dundas between Jarvis and Bond are a better example.

Pillars create unnecessary obstacles along the sidewalks. Pedestrians already have to deal with newspaper boxes, bus shelters (not that they're bad), utility poles, parking meters, garbage/recycling boxes, etc. Thankfully the awnings on TLS do not have pillars and I find those one to be ok as well.
 
To clarify a bit:

On the site plan (first page I believe) the retail spaces are denoted with a tighter grid pattern than the other spaces. They include: the figure-eight shaped space at the north-east corner, the north and south portions of the taller residential tower, and the independent structure slightly south-west of that. There are four retail spaces in all, many of which face both the courtyard and the street.

Also, scarberiankhatru and others, don't think of the canopy as a 'podium' in the traditional sense since it is not a structure itself, but merely protective cover. It does not have any walls or doors and is primarily there to replace the 'green footprint' of the towers and provide protection for those traveling under it. The best way to think about it is sort of like the old canopy (recently removed) at Bay/Charles towers. My second to last and last photos show this best .
 
ProjectEnd said:
Also, scarberiankhatru and others, don't think of the canopy as a 'podium' in the traditional sense since it is not a structure itself, but merely protective cover.
Click to expand...

I'm not thinking of it that way, I'm thinking of it as paying attention to the bottom part of the complex and I called it a podium because it is, cumulatively, a podium...literally, the buildings' feet.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top