One thing I appreciate about Boston, NYC, Montreal, and Europe is the consistency of their build form. There's no hodgepodge of buildings of different heights, age, and style like in Toronto. My friend from Montreal had to laugh when he saw the Distillery District (among other places). "This is beyond ridiculous. In Paris or old Montreal, you won't see a random pair of glass towers smack in the middle of it.", he said. I would much rather see this building restored to it's former glory, like with the Dineen building or 650 Bay St Boutigue Hotel. If it has to be redeveloped, why not build something that's more reasonable and respectful for the area? A couple of examples that I like are
1,
2, and
3.
and also lowrise buildings don't automatically guarantee street liveliness either. Lowrise take many forms, could be just a residential house, or a Burger King, or 711, or a Scotiabank, another CIBC. None of this is "interesting", and it is exactly what the intersection of Spadina and College has.
Spadina/College is definitely not an interesting non-chain retail spot, and I doubt a 22 story rental will make it worse. Why is a 22 story condo with a burger King/CIBC on the ground level any worse than ... just a two story Burger King/CIBC?
Many of those chains you complain about have replaced much older and more attractive buildings that once stood there. Please, find me any modern street in Toronto that has any charm, soul, or creativity whatsoever. If you think redevelopment will make Spadina look more like Paris, Vienna or Munich, you're wrong. What will happen is that the eclectic and narrow storefronts will be consolidated into much larger ones, enclosed by a plain wall of glass that looks identical to any new building, and occupied by either a Starbucks, bank, drug mart, or clinic. Many of the new buildings won't last half as long as the old buildings they replace. The cookie-cutter towers will be dominated by glass and spandrel like everywhere else, perhaps with a little grey brick if we're lucky (which seems to be the latest fad in this city). Each block will have one or two properties that won't get redeveloped, so we'll get a bunch of blank walls abutting them. They won't all be mid rise either, after all we're talking about a 22 storey proposal here. And while that happens, transit won't be getting less crowded, public schools won't be expanded, hospital wait times won't be getting any shorter, and roads won't be getting any wider.
I think we all regret the loss of countless victorians for the 'towers in the park' and brutalist slabs that dominate places like St James Town or the old Regent Park (which was modern at the time, and seemed like a good idea). Be careful what you wish for.
Its not the tall buildings that suck but how they meet the street. Improve the street elements and you won't even notice the tower above.
The tower is important too. It's not like they're invisible unless you stand right in front of it. But if developers can't even get the street elements right, then they should piss off.
