ProjectEnd
Superstar
/\ Agreed about the relationship to the street but it is very early days so I'm optimistic.
Toronto Nobu Residences Toronto | 156.66m | 45s | Madison Group | Teeple Architects
- Thread starter yyzer
- Start date
Stupidandshallow
Active Member
Is the proposed hotel still a W hotel?
The W has only ever been speculation. It still might be them. There's no reason it couldn't be them, but until any hotel brand is signed the developer will never say which brand it will be. I have altered the thread title to reflect what we are sure about.
As this is markedly taller than anything else close by - and the only things taller nearby (the Mirvish+Gehry towers) were approved through an Official Plan Amendment and not just a Zoning Bylaw Amendment, it is quite possible that City Planning might require the same here too—if they don't reject it outright for being nearly 20 storeys taller than its closest neighbours.
OPAs are much tougher to get than a ZBAs, and the City simply won't want to go that route as they won't want to do that for anything much less compelling than Mirvish in terms of what it offers back to the city (new OCAD facility, new art gallery), while the developer will want to get this done in less time/for less money through a ZBA. Running to the OMB would not be a sure thing here.
Personally, I'm happy that the design breaks the monotony of 157 metre skyline now formed by Festival Tower, Cinema Tower, Pinnacle Adelaide, Theatre Park, and soon to be joined by Noir, PJ Condos, and a bunch of other proposals in the area. I like the giant squared-off 0. I like the Teeps. I like Teeps's not all glass ziggety zaggity design (but it does need more work near ground level).
Yes, it's early days. This will be very interesting to follow.
42
As this is markedly taller than anything else close by - and the only things taller nearby (the Mirvish+Gehry towers) were approved through an Official Plan Amendment and not just a Zoning Bylaw Amendment, it is quite possible that City Planning might require the same here too—if they don't reject it outright for being nearly 20 storeys taller than its closest neighbours.
OPAs are much tougher to get than a ZBAs, and the City simply won't want to go that route as they won't want to do that for anything much less compelling than Mirvish in terms of what it offers back to the city (new OCAD facility, new art gallery), while the developer will want to get this done in less time/for less money through a ZBA. Running to the OMB would not be a sure thing here.
Personally, I'm happy that the design breaks the monotony of 157 metre skyline now formed by Festival Tower, Cinema Tower, Pinnacle Adelaide, Theatre Park, and soon to be joined by Noir, PJ Condos, and a bunch of other proposals in the area. I like the giant squared-off 0. I like the Teeps. I like Teeps's not all glass ziggety zaggity design (but it does need more work near ground level).
Yes, it's early days. This will be very interesting to follow.
42
condovo
Senior Member
A 67-storey double-tower on little Mercer St? Ain't going to happen.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Interestingly enough though, neither Cressy, nor planning, nor urban design, nor the audience voiced any serious concerns about the height. Issues were raised about parking, laneway access, construction blockage of Mercer, guest access to the hotel entrance and loss of privacy for the building to the south (the Icon I believe?) but nothing substantive about height.
It led me to remark to my colleges afterwards how far the dialogue has come in the last ten years. The work Adam began with regard to engaging developers in a constructive dialogue with the community is certainly being continued, albeit with a style all his own, by Cressy. Kudos are certainly well-deserved all around.
It led me to remark to my colleges afterwards how far the dialogue has come in the last ten years. The work Adam began with regard to engaging developers in a constructive dialogue with the community is certainly being continued, albeit with a style all his own, by Cressy. Kudos are certainly well-deserved all around.
There were also general concerns expressed re: traffic in the area already, shadows, those standards, but no, no-one raised any concern about the height specifically.
Someone did raise a concern about not having anywhere to shop in the area (I presume he meant groceries specifically) and synchronicitally* enough (*not a word), the very next presentation re: 400 Front West answered those concerns.
42
Someone did raise a concern about not having anywhere to shop in the area (I presume he meant groceries specifically) and synchronicitally* enough (*not a word), the very next presentation re: 400 Front West answered those concerns.
42
agoraflaneur
Active Member
Regarding the possibility of Dubai-style smack downs of this design, I would say that this doesn't at all resemble an emirati ostentation but rather tilts more scandanavian. Kind of Koolhaas CCTV-lite. It is modernist in its lines, and speaks to an evolution of modernism rather than an attempt at adding regalia. I look forward to seeing more information regarding its design.
G.L.17
Senior Member
What I found interesting too, someone also suggested the tower's floor plates be slimmer, and even raise the height to compensate. It's almost as if concerns over height are slowly getting to be a thing of the past, for certain areas of course.
Lenser
Senior Member
An exciting design. Agreed, it looks like it has a clean, sleek look. Looking forward to more news, clearer renders.
stjames2queenwest
Senior Member
Agreed, literally before seeing this update I was walking past Picasso hoping that teeple would get to do something taller. The shape... I dunno. I think I like it but not what I was expecting.
WiddleBittyKitty
Felis catus
This is quite the tease. It's bold, detailed, a little crazy, yet still constrained and simple, all at the same time. I suppose we are waiting to see more on the base.
If Madison are determined to make a mark on the skyline, which the shape of this suggests they are - why ever would you propose linking the towers up top if the bridge section were hidden by everything else around it? - then I suppose there is going to have to be a big give back to the city. I wonder what that will be. I suspect condovo and 42 are right that they've got a fight on their hands to get approval for that.
If Madison are determined to make a mark on the skyline, which the shape of this suggests they are - why ever would you propose linking the towers up top if the bridge section were hidden by everything else around it? - then I suppose there is going to have to be a big give back to the city. I wonder what that will be. I suspect condovo and 42 are right that they've got a fight on their hands to get approval for that.
Edward
Senior Member
Wow. That's amazing.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
No complaints - though the separation of the linked towers might be a bit of an issue (20m is a bit below the 25 recommended). The rendering isn't communicating a lot about the materials used, nor the street level integration. Early days I suppose.
AoD
AoD
Tewder
Senior Member
I like it. It reminds of the Arche de la Défense, except liveable. Lighting will be effective.
http://maitresse-myriam.eklablog.com/architecture-la-grande-arche-de-la-defense-a100352449
http://maitresse-myriam.eklablog.com/architecture-la-grande-arche-de-la-defense-a100352449
Attachments
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Last edited: