Toronto 45 The Esplanade | 128.85m | 39s | Republic | Arcadis

Petrawise said:
In short: said building has no architectural merit. It is a cheap imitation of a classically-styled building. .dwg can provide a more comprehensive explanation as to why this building is not worth preserving.
Click to expand...
You are missing the visual appeal from your equation. Telling folks there is a need to tear down something that looks good is never going to sell.
 
Petrawise said:
In short: said building has no architectural merit. It is a cheap imitation of a classically-styled building. .dwg can provide a more comprehensive explanation as to why this building is not worth preserving.
Click to expand...
The way I see things is any building or its facade of any decade should be preserved. If it sets a presence in its location in having some form of character with detailed cladding etc. Not because it's a knock off of something from the past. This building blends in with the art deco style building next to it. We have so many modern glass skyscrapers in this city. And we don't need two more in this location. If anything they should be creating a tower that blends in to what we have already! One day they'll be tearing down the Royal Bank because it's had its days for something cheap looking !
 
Last edited:
Petrawise said:
In short: said building has no architectural merit. It is a cheap imitation of a classically-styled building. .dwg can provide a more comprehensive explanation as to why this building is not worth preserving.
Click to expand...
"Merit" from a design standpoint, no. But there is probably embodied carbon merit. This building also draws attention to how bad all glass street walls are. The only money they put into the building is on the ground floor and I literally never noticed the EIFS until it was mentioned in this thread. Architecture above the second floor is overrated. The fact that the new building would be a step down is a red flag.
 
DSC said:
The St Lawrence community.
Click to expand...
I live in the St Lawrence community so it certainly wasn't everyone in the neighbourhood. And there was a post about this in the St Lawrence community FB group where hundreds of people have indicated they do not like the design/did not get a chance to give feedback.

So it feels a bit deceptive to just say "the St Lawrence community" overall shaped this design.
 
urbanexplorer said:
I live in the St Lawrence community so it certainly wasn't everyone in the neighbourhood. And there was a post about this in the St Lawrence community FB group where hundreds of people have indicated they do not like the design/did not get a chance to give feedback.

So it feels a bit deceptive to just say "the St Lawrence community" overall shaped this design.
Click to expand...
Do you seriously expect everyone to like anything? Look at the views expressed here on virtually every proposal by generally reasonable people. That said, the St Lawrence Neighbourhood Assn and the residents at 55 The Esplanade immediately next door certainly worked with the developer to improve the proposals for 75 The Esplanade, I was only involved very peripherally and I doubt they got everything they wanted but these neighbourhood conversations (in addition to the statutory meetings the City must hold) can really help improve developments. I do not follow the SL Facebook group but if anyone felt they 'did not get a chance to give feedback" they were not paying attention.
 
DSC said:
Do you seriously expect everyone to like anything? Look at the views expressed here on virtually every proposal by generally reasonable people. That said, the St Lawrence Neighbourhood Assn and the residents at 55 The Esplanade immediately next door certainly worked with the developer to improve the proposals for 75 The Esplanade, I was only involved very peripherally and I doubt they got everything they wanted but these neighbourhood conversations (in addition to the statutory meetings the City must hold) can really help improve developments. I do not follow the SL Facebook group but if anyone felt they 'did not get a chance to give feedback" they were not paying attention.
Click to expand...
Don't put words in my mouth. I wanted to know who specifically gave feedback on this project already from the community - what the selection criteria was.

You're (dismissive) comment about "the st lawrence community" wasn't really accurate was it because as you've further clarified (and since answered my original question) it was only people who are members of the SLNA and the neighbours in the building at 55 Esplanade.

Personally, I want to know how to impact developments like this from in the future while also pointing all my neighbours in the right direction.
 
urbanexplorer said:
Don't put words in my mouth. I wanted to know who specifically gave feedback on this project already from the community - what the selection criteria was.

You're (dismissive) comment about "the st lawrence community" wasn't really accurate was it because as you've further clarified (and since answered my original question) it was only people who are members of the SLNA and the neighbours in the building at 55 Esplanade.

Personally, I want to know how to impact developments like this from in the future while also pointing all my neighbours in the right direction.
Click to expand...

Turn down the temperature please.

DSC is a very valuable member of this forum, and long time contributor. Further, his answer was not misleading, members of the SLNA and neighbours of the development in question are in fact members of the St. Lawrence community.

Working groups cannot and never will be dozens or hundreds of people.

They will be representatives of stakeholder groups, such as the SNLA or the BIA; and perhaps a small number of individuals who make a compelling case to join.

****

Development can always be influenced outside that process by participating in statutory public meetings; by writing/speaking to the planner on the file, or communicating directly with the developer.

That information on projects is available both through the City and in most applicable threads here at UT.

UT is probably your single best source, on average, to know about developments before they become more broadly public; however, in the St. Lawrence Community, being actively involved with the SLNA is a great
way to keep up on neighbourhood happenings.

I think you would find there are few people better placed to help you in your quest to keep informed, and contribute than @DSC .

****

On this development; you have this thread.

In the title of the thread, you have the name of the developer; "Republic", you can 'watch' this thread for new developments and you can choose to reach out to Republic who happen to be a member here at UT.

Aside from the SLNA, should you wish to be considered for any working group; that will be organized through the Coucillor's office; and you can reach out to them now and express an interest should such a group be formed
for this development (which it probably will)

The Councillor's contact info is below:

1642788477255.png
 
Northern Light said:
Turn down the temperature please.

DSC is a very valuable member of this forum, and long time contributor. Further, his answer was not misleading, members of the SLNA and neighbours of the development in question are in fact members of the St. Lawrence community.

Working groups cannot and never will be dozens or hundreds of people.

They will be representatives of stakeholder groups, such as the SNLA or the BIA; and perhaps a small number of individuals who make a compelling case to join.

****

Development can always be influenced outside that process by participating in statutory public meetings; by writing/speaking to the planner on the file, or communicating directly with the developer.

That information on projects is available both through the City and in most applicable threads here at UT.

UT is probably your single best source, on average, to know about developments before they become more broadly public; however, in the St. Lawrence Community, being actively involved with the SLNA is a great
way to keep up on neighbourhood happenings.

I think you would find there are few people better placed to help you in your quest to keep informed, and contribute than @DSC .

****

On this development; you have this thread.

In the title of the thread, you have the name of the developer; "Republic", you can 'watch' this thread for new developments and you can choose to reach out to Republic who happen to be a member here at UT.

Aside from the SLNA, should you wish to be considered for any working group; that will be organized through the Councillor's office; and you can reach out to them now and express an interest should such a group be formed
for this development (which it probably will)

The Councillor's contact info is below:

View attachment 375855
Click to expand...
Oh my bad, I didn't realize DSC was a longtime contributor and a very valuable member, I should have known better. That's on my for not realizing that they were referring to the smaller group of stakeholders - SNLA & 55 Esplanade.

Thanks for all that well-laid out additional info, I'll leverage this when speaking with the members of the community that were feeling like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the proposal.
 
Northern Light said:
I've been reading comments here and thinking about my take.

Here it is in bits and pieces:

1) I think there is a near consensus that the grade-experience has been mishandled. Some lament the loss of the colonnade; others less so; but all agree that as structured it neither pleases those who would love to see some version of the colonnade stay; nor those who would be happy with a more modern take, if done well.

I'm personally open to there not being a colonnade here. But if there is going to be one, then it should mirror the scale/grandeur of what's next door, even though the treatment might vary.

Regardless, what's proposed does not work.

2) I appreciate the choice for a bold use of colour, which we so often lament a shortage of here on UT. But I'm left feeling that this isn't the right place for this particular expression; it's borderline garish and over-the-top, and just doesn't give off the Esplanade vibe to me. Not a bad idea, wrong spot.

3) The towers are fine. Brilliant no; but decent enough.

4) The way in which the black box is expressed as part of the podium doesn't work for me. I don't mind the box; In a different spot, I might not mind the vertical golden hue; but to me they don't speak cohesively as a single podium; they appear to be 2 different architectural expressions grafted together rather oddly.

Summation: Parts of this are good; but maybe for somewhere else; some parts are bad anywhere. Re-think everything from the podium down.
Click to expand...
Respectfully disagree, in that I like the cantilevered podium (makes the area feel more open and walkable than what's currently there), especially the curve in it, and I love the bold choice of color (though I worry that it won't survive). I know a lot of people on this site like the traditional colonnade, and I acknowledge that it looks good on pics, but as someone who lives right next to this building I know that it makes for a dark and unpleasant walking experience (perhaps if the ceiling was higher and the colors less grey/sterile I could learn to appreciate colonnades)
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
urbanexplorer said:
Oh my bad, I didn't realize DSC was a longtime contributor and a very valuable member, I should have known better. That's on my for not realizing that they were referring to the smaller group of stakeholders - SNLA & 55 Esplanade.

Thanks for all that well-laid out additional info, I'll leverage this when speaking with the members of the community that were feeling like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the proposal.
Click to expand...
Whether I am valued is certainly up for debate BUT if you live in the St Lawrence area you are (as @Northern Light says) a member of the St Lawrence community and the SLNA meetings are open to ALL members of the community. It may be true to say that there were/are 'members of the community that were feeling like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the proposal.' They had a chance and were either unaware of it or failed to attend either an SLNA meeting or the obligatory public consultation run by the City.
 
A lot of comments in this thread bemoan the long, featureless glass wall that forms the streetscape of the proposed building. It seems to be another implementation of the trend of "clean lines" in architecture. What proponents of this trend fail to appreciate is that engaging streetscapes need granularity and texture. They need something new to look at every few steps as you walk past a building, otherwise it reads as sterile and unwelcoming. These are qualities that 19th and early 20th century streetscapes all over the city have in abundance but more recent streetscapes tend to lack. A long, featureless wall doesn't make an engaging streetscape, even if it's made of glass and has retail behind it. The designers of Mirvish Village get it, the people who designed this building don't.
 
evandyk said:
Here is an example of the difference between the two, one on each side of Queen, at Logan.

www.google.ca

Google Maps

Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.ca www.google.ca
Click to expand...
I actually think that building creates a fairly good streetscape. Sure it lacks the cornice and brickwork of a lot of the older buildings, but the mass of it is visually broken into smaller parts and the storefronts are narrow. Even if a larger tenant combined multiple storefronts together it would still read as narrow storefronts with granularity at street level. It even has strong sign bands and the retail entrances in alcoves, which are sadly missing from most new buildings.

What I'm talking about is more along the lines of this. The building does have a strong design sense, I'll give it that. But the brick and glass are long, flat expanses, it has no signbands at all, and nothing in the design breaks up the bulk of the building. The fact that it's in the Distillery District makes the contrast with older buildings all the more stark.

Or this, which is a fail on so many levels.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top