scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
Like Mississauga's Absolut?
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
"What the City wants" is constantly changing. What they wanted in the 1950's and '60's was towers surrounded by lots of breathing space, now they want "meet the sidewalk", and one day it'll be something different yet again. Fashions in planning come and go but good design - the TD Centre surrounded by all that currently unfashionable breathing space, for instance - survives.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Exactly! Curvy and distinguished but not hokey.
salvius
Active Member
Funny you pick TD Centre, because the unfashionable and unused breathing space is without a doubt a design feature of the complex, and a very weak one at that...
Design also includes context; TD Centre would have looked very odd plunked in the middle of the Distillery.
Yes, yes, we know US, you like the design of the building, even if it could be anywhere else in the city, and you like the obviously exposed parking lot. You've made that point at least a few dozen times in this thread alone.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
A fairly recent example of the ever-changing nature of "what the city wants" is the new heights to which condo towers are rising. It wasn't that many years ago that 25 storeys seemed to be some sort of upper limit, with few exceptions. Now we're seeing 35, 40 and 45 storey buildings going up all over the place.
Yes, salvius, of course the TD Centre open space was designed that way - Mies didn't just plunk the buildings down on a whim in an empty plain.
Yes, salvius, of course the TD Centre open space was designed that way - Mies didn't just plunk the buildings down on a whim in an empty plain.
Yes, yes, we know Salvius, you don't like the design of the building...
US can have his say just like you can, even a dozen times or more, like you can, and I'd say right now the not-in-favour side is winning, so why sound like a schoolgirl whose pigtails are tied too tight?
This thread reads like a bunch of kids standing on across from each other on a playground screaming "Yeah?" "Yeah!" "Yeah?" "Yeah!" at each other. This latest bit about 'what the city wants' is more oversimplification which a bunch of you have jumped all over as if it were the full uncomplicated truth. The building of projects like this are devilishly complex with many competing rights demanding to be taken into account.
The City can't just stop every aspect of every project they don't like, and developers can't build just anything they want. All of this has come to be out of lots of negotiation involving lots of interests.
Remember that before Cityscape went in and risked a ton of money to fix up the area, Options for Homes was dropping inelegant apartment buildings square on top of rackhouses that no-one else wanted to invest in. This area could have ended up with a lot more of the latter.
42
jaborandi
Active Member
OH YEAH!!!
salvius
Active Member
This 'what the city' wants bit was obtained from a senior city planner to whom I had the chance to talk to in private. I got what I believe is a fairly accurate explanation of why the project had garnered so little controversy (key point here).
To this I got a reply that urban planners are simply into 'fashions' (as if architects, for example, aren't and as if urban design had nothing to do with anything). TD Centre won't work in just any context, and it's fair to say that the 'breathing space' is not particularily used, and is from a functional point a failure.
Where did I suggest otherwise? Developers in this city DO have a ton of influence but I certainly was not talking about developers in general (though I do think that these kinds of 'rewards' are not unheard of).
Indeed, and was this not my original point...? The city was well aware of the risk CityScape took to redevelop this area, and it did so using its private purse. They LIKE CityScape. It made some very wise decisions, such as banning chain stores, for example; and indeed planners are impressed at what has been achieved so far. This is therefore a reward for a job well done.
Basically, few planners agree that this is the best building for the neighbourhood. And few planners think that building a 50 storey condo is anything to gush about; and it obviously has an influence on the future development in the West Don Lands. But there is so little controversy BECAUSE CityScape took a risk; it didn't go over as well as they expected and they took a huge financial hit. The city decided to 'help' them out rather than to put road blocks.
I did not even make a comment whether this is legitimate or not (I'm still not sure myself).
Attack if you will, but please read the post first...
AndreaPalladio
Senior Member
I don't think it is fair to say that. I don't even think it's correct.
salvius
Active Member
Ok, it isn't fair to say that, and we can argue about it too, perhaps in a different thread; my bad for going OT on that one.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
Breathing space functions to visually isolate buildings, to draw attention to them as sculptural elements, and it allows them to 'talk' to one-another. Clewes sets up such a diologue between the tower at 18 Yorkville and the town homes that are part of the same development, and Gehry's AGO will chatter to Alsop's OCAD to name a couple of other examples - anywhere that space exists between buildings lively conversation is possible. Clewes refers to that process in the quote he gives in the Toronto Urban Design Awards thread: "The spaces in between, are ultimately the things that matter most to the city."
Stand at the north east corner of King and Bay and the TD Centre building dialogue becomes obvious. Will any future development in the downtown core have the opportunity to set that up? Several city blocks were demolished to enable it, so probably not. The spaces between the towers are well used during the summer by people who work downtown, so they function pretty well at the time of year when people are out and enjoying the nice weather.
Stand at the north east corner of King and Bay and the TD Centre building dialogue becomes obvious. Will any future development in the downtown core have the opportunity to set that up? Several city blocks were demolished to enable it, so probably not. The spaces between the towers are well used during the summer by people who work downtown, so they function pretty well at the time of year when people are out and enjoying the nice weather.
Andrew3D
Active Member
This thread keeps swinging way off topic, and yes it's even possible I've been guilty of that in here as well. Perhaps it's time to create a Pure Spirits Argument thread (name it what you will) in the Buildings and Architecture or the General Discussions rooms. It would be nice to finally open this thread seeing as it's always flagged as having new comments or materials added and actually have updates of this construction site.
I'm not pointing fingers at any single person, if any thread ever needed to get back on track it has to be this one.
With that said here I go. Not sure if these have made it onto this thread yet.
I'm not pointing fingers at any single person, if any thread ever needed to get back on track it has to be this one.
With that said here I go. Not sure if these have made it onto this thread yet.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
So is it just the one tower for now? When does phase II begin?
I gotta say, the rooftop 'garden' and the lobby look fantastic!
I gotta say, the rooftop 'garden' and the lobby look fantastic!
adma
Superstar
But don't assume that those preservationist types questioning the former are approving of the latter, either. (It only seems otherwise, because those popped up before discussion forums like this germinated. It was a desolate time for "true" urban discussion.)
Incidentally, I agree that Salvius is oversimplifying things by deeming the TD plaza a "failure". But what I'm persistently wondering about is: why is it that those coming most avidly in defence here of the Clear/Pure Spirit urban approach seem to be gay male aesthetes? It just strikes me as terribly...*monochrome*, somehow...
I haven't had time to answer the other points yet - but I do have time for a quick word here:
Although I am loathe to 'out' someone on this forum, (forgive me Andrew), I have to tell you that Andrew3D is straight. So now that you know that, it would not be fair to suddenly deduct 'cool points' from your perception of him, and he should suffer no loss of esteem here. It's not Andrew's choice to be straight after all, he was born that way, and I support him, and all that, you've heard it all before, etc.
I am sure if I went through the thread I'd find a number of other breeders (is that what you call yourselves?) who also find the juxtaposition of old and new here invigorating, but I just don't have time right now. Adma - I am under the impression that your aesthetic sense is rather well tuned...
42