Toronto Daniels Waterfront - City of the Arts | 156.05m | 45s | Daniels | RAW Design

opalz said:
They need to start making that waterfront east LRT soon. It's a long walk to get to these developments.
Click to expand...

As much as I like LRT I'm not looking forward to QQ East resembling the chaotic jumbled mess of a street that exists on QQ West. There are too many modes of transportation vying for space: car lanes, ROW LRT, and bike lanes just to get to the other side. I avoid QQ West as much as I can.

It would be extremely expensive to build car access to underground parking for those condos but Queens Quay would be a far more successful street with no cars at all. People praise QQ West but it's not a very nice street imo.
 
Last edited:
evandyk said:
I like QQ West, but have only driven on it a handful of times compared to the hundreds of times I've gone through on foot, bike or streetcar.
Click to expand...

Well yes, if you're driving QQ West is fine. If you're a tourist or going down there for relaxation/enjoyment it's an awful street. What's south of the road is fine but the road itself is a disaster of competing interests.
 
It's driving it that I didn't like, as it's very confusing in parts. That's why people used to keep driving into the streetcar tunnel.

But if you're a tourist or going down there for relaxation or enjoyment, you're not likely to be on the road. You'll be on the bike path or pedestrian zones between that and the lake, and those are quite nice.
 
isaidso said:
As much as I like LRT I'm not looking forward to QQ East resembling the chaotic jumbled mess of a street that exists on QQ West. There are too many modes of transportation vying for space: car lanes, ROW LRT, and bike lanes just to get to the other side. I avoid QQ West as much as I can.

It would be extremely expensive to build car access to underground parking for those condos but Queens Quay would be a far more successful street with no cars at all. People praise QQ West but it's not a very nice street imo.
Click to expand...

I think QQE will turn out better in that it doesn't have to accommodate building access off the street post-hoc, unlike QQW, where the need to address access issues necessitated a whole lot of compromises. Also QQE will be taking in some very specific learns around delineating spaces in order to reduce confusion as to who goes where.

AoD
 
B8785009-29D9-4419-A554-2423D0B5213B.jpeg
 
Nadnev said:
This is obviously a subjective opinion - but that park is terrible. Who wants to bring a child to play beside a major highway?!? Why it wasn't just made into a dog park on the northern end and grassy space on the southern end is beyond me. Cheaper, simple, effective.
Click to expand...
Landscape architects aren't interested in creating designs that are proven to work. They're interested in artistic, pretentious designs that reinvent the wheel with every project. The fact that the people the park is created for don't want to spend time there doesn't seem to matter to them. Why the profession has devolved to this point is anybody's guess.

isaidso said:
I love the water feature but agree about the parkette. I find the current park aesthetic proliferating to be bizarre. They're overly busy and seem designed for people with ADD. How one is supposed to relax in these 'jungle gym for adults' type places is beyond me. I've visited this particular space 10+ times but never wanted to stay more than 2-3 minutes.
Click to expand...
As someone with ADD, allow me to assure you that they even failed on that. I find the park as baffling as everyone else.
 
MisterF said:
Landscape architects aren't interested in creating designs that are proven to work. They're interested in artistic, pretentious designs that reinvent the wheel with every project. The fact that the people the park is created for don't want to spend time there doesn't seem to matter to them. Why the profession has devolved to this point is anybody's guess.


As someone with ADD, allow me to assure you that they even failed on that. I find the park as baffling as everyone else.
Click to expand...

That's a rather broad claim - Sugar Beach and Corktown Commons are both designed by landscape architects - and both worked.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
That's a rather broad claim - Sugar Beach and Corktown Commons are both designed by landscape architects - and both worked.

AoD
Click to expand...
You could add Berczy and St James Parks remakes too. Just as some architects (or, dare I say it?) developers are better than others so are some landscape architects (or even UT contributors!)
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
That's a rather broad claim - Sugar Beach and Corktown Commons are both designed by landscape architects - and both worked.

AoD
Click to expand...
You're right, it was a broad claim and there are definitely exceptions to my criticism. It's just that bad design resulting in empty parks is so common. There's no real reason why all new public parks shouldn't be as well designed as Berczy Park or Sugar Beach. It's not like the basics of what makes a space welcoming are unknown or expensive. And yet the failure rate is incredibly high.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
I think QQE will turn out better in that it doesn't have to accommodate building access off the street post-hoc, unlike QQW, where the need to address access issues necessitated a whole lot of compromises. Also QQE will be taking in some very specific learns around delineating spaces in order to reduce confusion as to who goes where.

AoD
Click to expand...
Yes, and QQW may end up getting some modifications, if the Toronto Accessibility Advisory Committee has anything to say about it. The Transportation Department tried using QQW as an example of excellence in urban accessibility design last year, and our committee shredded their illusory vision of design "excellence".
 
MisterF said:
You're right, it was a broad claim and there are definitely exceptions to my criticism. It's just that bad design resulting in empty parks is so common. There's no real reason why all new public parks shouldn't be as well designed as Berczy Park or Sugar Beach. It's not like the basics of what makes a space welcoming are unknown or expensive. And yet the failure rate is incredibly high.
Click to expand...
I think the problem is partly that 'people' want every park to appeal to all possible audiences/users. Kids, adults, active, inactive, dogs, summer, winter. Sometimes (in fact, often) choices must be made!
 
Last edited:
DSC said:
I think the problem is partly that 'people' want every park to appeal to all possible audiences/users. Kids, adults, active, inactive dogs, summer, winter. Sometimes (in fact, often) choices must be made!
Click to expand...

There is that, there is also the issue of letting the design theme dictate usage; poor execution is also unfortunately common here in Toronto as well. It is tempting to attribute failures to Modern landscape architecture, but I think a case by case study would be more helpful.

AoD
 
irishboy said:
While the towers certainly do not turn heads, the courtyard is coming together nicely. There is a decent retail presence there already with a few restos still to come. As mentioned in an earlier post by others, a Great Lakes Brewpub is also coming and will occupy a large portion of the space.
Click to expand...
for a complex that brands itself 'City of the Arts' the courtyard is pretty corporate, generic and sterile..it feels like a mall food court. the only redeeming business is the indian street food place. hopefully the brew pub will change the atmosphere.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top