Toronto Peter and Adelaide | 152.39m | 47s | Graywood | BBB

Personally, I wouldn't call this a higher standard of design because of some curvy, "tacked on" elements but, that's not really the point.

It's a bit much to say it's a failure in planning because this proposal is too tall, too fat or, whatever. There are cities with more restrictive planning policy that manage to consistency put up nicer designs than this. There is no reason an even better design from a city planning and stylistic standpoint can't result from this. How many amazing towers are the result of years, even a decade's worth of revisions through discussions between the developer, public, and planners. Most of it's on the developer's shoulders and, ultimately, the consumers to demand better.

This is just the first step. Let's not give up despite all mediocrity that has been rushed through to feed the boom.
 
Last edited:
maestro said:
Personally, I wouldn't call this a higher standard of design because of some curvy, "tacked on" elements but, that's not really the point.

It's a bit much to say it's a failure in planning because this proposal is too tall, too fat or, whatever. There are cities with more restrictive planning policy that manages to consistency put up nicer designs than this. There is no reason an even better design from a city planning and stylistic standpoint can't result from this. It's on the developer's shoulders and, ultimately, the consumers to demand better.
Click to expand...

You're right to say it's not a clear 1:1 relationship between planning policies and design quality, but it's absolutely true that there are some hindrances. Similarly, I don't think there's a clear tie-in from consumer demand to finished product for a bunch of reasons. It's a logical sentiment, but there's so much demand in the city for housing right now that developers can put up a really crap product and still have it sell well.

I definitely agree that there's a whole crop of Toronto developers who simply need to do better. At the same time, the ones who genuinely do care about quality have legitimate grievances with various aspects of the planning regime that hinder their efforts to more consistently produce a better finished product.
 
This has been reduced to one 47-storey tower:
upload_2017-7-18_11-17-12.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-7-18_11-17-12.png
    upload_2017-7-18_11-17-12.png
    768.7 KB · Views: 762
ADRM said:
Ugh, and all the most interesting elements are gone.
Click to expand...

Personally I am not terribly convinced by that curvy element - it adds nothing to the project and felt cheap. That Adelaide fronting slab is still awkward looking as hell. And what's with that weird projection outward on the tower at 4/5s that doesn't relate to anything else? Would have looked better if it wasn't there.

An improvement over the previous version - I'd cut the Adelaide slab down to the level of its' neighbour and add a few floors to the tower to compenstate.

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Personally I am not terribly convinced by that curvy element. That Adelaide fronting slab is still awkward looking as hell.

AoD
Click to expand...

I really like the elevator shaft curvy bit and thought it could serve as an interesting jumping off point for a bit more creativity in the core. But, yeah, that Adelaide slab is atrocious; it's like a weird and bad mix of 135 Yorkville and City of the Arts.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
And I wish they'd buy out that Templar hotel. Anyways, the tower would look pretty good and stands out if executed well.

AoD
Click to expand...

Yeah, my lowered-standard-self is at least buoyed by the fact that the tower is now the best part of the latest/possibly final design; a bit like a more colourful, vertical Brant Park.
 
ADRM said:
Yeah, my lowered-standard-self is at least buoyed by the fact that the tower is now the best part of the latest/possibly final design; a bit like a more colourful, vertical Brant Park.
Click to expand...

And I am a sucker for those Y columns even though the podium itself can be improved some more. Certainly beats that wavy thing in the previous proposal.

AoD
 
I thought the organically shaped core was a bit gimmicky, unresolved and most likely to be axed due to its cost.
This new design is not bad and rather tasteful. It's nice to see warmer coloured materials used.
It kind of makes the Templar Hotel looks like its entrance.

If the Templar and the fur store building were gone, it would make for a very nice public plaza on the corner and a grand entrance for the building.
 
Still awkward and unresolved. Needs more refinement. And get rid of those Y columns. They've got nothing to do with grid design vocabulary.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top