[UtakataNoAnnex]

Glossed over so far is that they doubled the number of parking spots. Which ordinarily would be a real shame, but if the city won't build transit before the buildings are there, what are people supposed to do other than drive in and out, which requires parking?

...walk, cycle and hopefully not get ran over in the process. >.<

 

[unrealestate]

The reality is the economy is complete trash at the moment. The condo market doesn't exist anymore. There are no buyers. Unemployment is 10%. Money isn't flowing. The previous design was drawn up in a very different environment.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

^...most of residential stuff here seems to be rental in nature.

 

[Start Fox]

Glossed over so far is that they doubled the number of parking spots. Which ordinarily would be a real shame, but if the city won't build transit before the buildings are there, what are people supposed to do other than drive in and out, which requires parking?

This is a very good point. I think this is a major failure by the City and Waterfront Toronto. The first buildings aren't expected to be occupied until 2031, and yet the developers feel that to properly attract tenants six years from now they need to spend significant sums of money to create hundreds of more parking spaces (that will exist forever, though many will probably sit empty or under-utilized once the QQE LRT is eventually built).

Those significant sums could go towards better architecture, better POPS, or hell just development charges that can help pay for the QQE LRT.

 

[GameOnBrad]

I posted this is the Ookwemin Minising Thread as well but also directly applies here.

Waterfront Toronto Open House 2025 - Thursday October 23rd​

251 Queens Quay East Toronto, ON M5A 0X3​

About This Event
Join us on October 23, 2025 to see how the next phase of waterfront revitalization is coming to life. Learn about the projects bringing new housing, destinations and connections to the eastern waterfront. Listen in on presentations to get the latest updates on Quayside, Ookwemin Minising and the Waterfront East Transit. Drop in any time to meet the teams working on these projects, ask questions and provide your feedback. Light refreshments will be served. Doors open at 5:30 pm.

Waterfront Toronto Open House 2025

Discover the next phase of Toronto’s waterfront — updates on Quayside, Ookwemin Minising & more. Drop in to learn & share feedback.

www.eventbrite.ca

 

[beepboop]

 

[CapitalSeven]

.... The first buildings aren't expected to be occupied until 2031, and yet the developers feel that to properly attract tenants six years from now they need to spend significant sums of money to create hundreds of more parking spaces (that will exist forever, though many will probably sit empty or under-utilized once the QQE LRT is eventually built).

But of course said LRT, streetcar that is, was supposed to be built long ago, according to the Transit First policy hallucination. That's where Toronto failed big and hard.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

But of course said LRT, streetcar that is, was supposed to be built long ago, according to the Transit First policy hallucination. That's where Toronto failed big and hard.

...I think it was more hot air than a hallucination. That is, it was only announced to score political points...but they weren't really planning to do anything about it. Opposed something they blazed up in boardroom hotbox. >.<

 

[Northern Light]

@AlexBozikovic has a new piece out on the latest iteration here..........

He's surprisingly gentle.

Waterfront Toronto goes big on housing and urban design with new development

Toronto City Council approved a plan that will deliver 1,100 market-rental apartments and 550 affordable units

www.theglobeandmail.com

From the above:

His description of the change is needed for further context:

Alex does go on to note, quite rightly:

His piece also touches on the costs here, and how far the 13B the Feds have committed to affordable housing will go (or not) by which he is conveying that governments will have to find significantly more money to achieve what is needed.

 

[AlexBozikovic]

The big move here was the urban design - a car-free public planted zone through the middle of the block - and that remains largely intact.

The actual designs for the condo towers are still TBD.

 

[IsaacKhouzam]

The big move here was the urban design - a car-free public planted zone through the middle of the block - and that remains largely intact.

The actual designs for the condo towers are still TBD.

I think this is too generous. The architecture previously supported the big move in the site plan by matching it with an equally bold architectural move. A big 12-storey wall running along the south side of the site worked because the architecture embraced that as a feature and made something of it. The new scheme, as you've described it, is struggling to "reconcile" something (the "unusual scale" of the 12-storey slab) that the previous scheme embraced and therefore was able to make beautiful. What we're left with has nothing to say architecturally except "sorry."

 

[ProjectEnd]

I think this is too generous. The architecture previously supported the big move in the site plan by matching it with an equally bold architectural move. A big 12-storey wall running along the south side of the site worked because the architecture embraced that as a feature and made something of it. The new scheme, as you've described it, is struggling to "reconcile" something (the "unusual scale" of the 12-storey slab) that the previous scheme embraced and therefore was able to make beautiful. What we're left with has nothing to say architecturally except "sorry."

Being an unbuildable phantasmagoria?

 

[Northern Light]

Being an unbuildable phantasmagoria?

We can agree it was a challenged proposal. Though I feel the need to once again reiterate that no one should be allowed to put forward anything unbuildable in a design competition.

***

That said, can we not agree that Teeple's effort here is a poor substitute? That there are firms could have delivered something better than what we're seeing? If you substitute a high quality product in retail, the rule is supposed to be equivalent or better. This is neither.

 

[IsaacKhouzam]

Being an unbuildable phantasmagoria?

I really don't understand this attitude. Yes, there were a host of reasons that the previous design as shown would have been expensive to the point of being unbuildable. There are also a thousand ways it could have transformed it into something buildable without throwing out everything that made it interesting. I don't accept that practical must equal ugly, and I don't think this city should either.

 

[ProjectEnd]

We can agree it was a challenged proposal. Though I feel the need to once again reiterate that no one should be allowed to put forward anything unbuildable in a design competition.

***

That said, can we not agree that Teeple's effort here is a poor substitute? That there are firms could have delivered something better than what we're seeing? If you substitute a high quality product in retail, the rule is supposed to be equivalent or better. This is neither.

I'm in no way saying the current iteration is better, and I agree that folks can't 'wow' with things they have no intention of actually doing or are not constructable. Menkes magic trick across the street being perhaps the prime example of this bullshit bait-and-switch.

I really don't understand this attitude. Yes, there were a host of reasons that the previous design as shown would have been expensive to the point of being unbuildable. There are also a thousand ways it could have transformed it into something buildable without throwing out everything that made it interesting. I don't accept that practical must equal ugly, and I don't think this city should either.

What do you mean 'attitude'? It's not about expense, wood as a material fundamentally doesn't work in the way the imagineers at Adjaye were implying it would in their pretty pictures. It was and is completely unbuildable as earlier depicted.