Toronto YC Condos -- Yonge at College | 198.42m | 62s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

Developers know that they can pay x amount for a property and get their money back because something beside it has been allowed y storeys. Even if the zoning might not allow y storeys on this particular site, there's a good chance the City will allow similar heights on adjacent properties. If the City says no, the developer appeals to the OMB, and the OMB will generally say "what has been given to one owner must be given to the abutting owner, what's fair for one is fair for the other". There must be extenuating circumstances for one property not to be allowed the same densities, heights, etc., as an adjacent one.

That's why you get developers confidently plunking down huge amounts on properties that currently don't feature large buildings.

42
 
The 3D version has not left me any happier. It still looks gastrointestinal, like a snake downing mice, but what are they referencing here? Why not pull out an old Toronto map, get the course of the locally buried Taddle Creek, and reference that in the building? Then it might have some meaning. I'd rather be able to provide an intelligent answer to the inevitable "what the hell is that supposed to be" when touring friends around, and not just be left with a sympathetic shrug.
 
I can't believe I'm saying this, but I actually have a soft spot for this building. The subtle little peak in the north-east corner and the angled balconies (not noticeable on the elevations but in the renderings it is) are interesting concepts, and I appreciate how the blank glass that the balconies give way to at the top of the tower allow it to just "breathe". Obviously there is a lot of room for improvement (podium, gastro-intestinal pattern down the middle) but it's generally quite restrained and the design language is fairly clear without being boring.

I think a roofline like the towers at St. George's Wharf (in London UK) would be cool here. Those buildings are hideous up-close but the glass tower sections with the whale-fin tops are quite graceful. For some reason this project reminds me of them a bit.

stgeorgewharf.jpg
 
Last edited:
I think it's great that local architects share ideas, are inspired by each other, and are influenced by the shared experience of the surrounding culture and context... and it is natural within any shared context that good ideas and solutions (to density issues, heritage and so on) rise to the top. Let's face it, it's hard to ignore ideas that work or that resonate!

The problem here is the source material, or more specificially the 'uniqueness'/novelty of 1 Bloor. It is designed to be a statement, an architectural flourish on the skyline. It is not intended to fit in contextualy, which means it is not meant to be reproduced or adapted by others. Attempts to do this will inevitably end up looking like cheap knock-offs, and this is the case here. The fact that G&C are so clearly aping a novel 1 Bloor design speaks volumes about their values and standards, quite frankly.
 
I'm very tempted (though not sure if I have the time or not) to use the dimensions from the plan drawings we've seen and create a refined/alternate design for this site.
 
Tewder said:
I think it's great that local architects share ideas, are inspired by each other, and are influenced by the shared experience of the surrounding culture and context... and it is natural within any shared context that good ideas and solutions (to density issues, heritage and so on) rise to the top. Let's face it, it's hard to ignore ideas that work or that resonate!

The problem here is the source material, or more specificially the 'uniqueness'/novelty of 1 Bloor. It is designed to be a statement, an architectural flourish on the skyline. It is not intended to fit in contextualy, which means it is not meant to be reproduced or adapted by others. Attempts to do this will inevitably end up looking like cheap knock-offs, and this is the case here. The fact that G&C are so clearly aping a novel 1 Bloor design speaks volumes about their values and standards, quite frankly.
Click to expand...


+1
 
Are you two trying to work out the formula for how long your potential ban will be? Posts should contribute something other than 9th grade math. Cheers!

÷42
 
Am I the only one who thinks this has a very dubaish feeling to it? personnally The render improved my impressions, but they still aren't great.
 
Oh, man. Lovin' these comments. Nothing gets people's creative juices flowing like a design they dislike. Healthy debate is good, though.

Vertical cow patties (thedeepend) has my vote for the best comment.

I think this design could look good with some work. Yes, the podium and digestive issues need to be fixed, but the top is also bad. It might be interesting to have the balconies (or at least that theme) figure in more prominently to the top and perhaps step up to a more pronounced finish. It looks weird because they just stop abruptly and the box continues.

That's my best attempt at trying to sound like I know the first thing about architecture, which I really don't. But I know what I like and, in this case, what I don't like.
 
I like how the box continues to rise. I just think it needs some angular finish, in the vein of St. George's Wharf (see my post above with image), but a sharper "V" shaped concrete roof feature that cuts down into the box/glass. Ah man, I think I'm being confusing and should just make a Sketchup design of it lol.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top