[AlvinofDiaspar]

greenleaf:

That's fair. But who gets to decide what visual interruption is? That's very subjective. At what point should view corridors start and stop? And who decides what a view corridor should be? Elected officials? Interest groups?

At the end of the day, elected officials - through the city bureaucracy, interest groups and citizens. Just like every planning decision. Unlike other planning concepts, I think almost everyone knows exactly what visual interruption is when they look north on Bay St. and see RoCP looming behind the Old City Hall clock tower.

For example, Madison, Wisconsin has a law that does not allow any building within the city to be taller than the capital building (a form of view corridor preservation). This has caused sprawl to increase and has pushed office complexes of a higher density outside of city limits. I argue that this preservation of view corridors may give the city more problems than solutions in the long run.

As a counter argument - Vancouver also has a policy on view corridors - it hasn't prevented the limitation of sprawl in that city. Beyond that, it's not like one is proposing view corridors everywhere - only on the case by case basis.

While I see your argument, I'm still not convinced that going down a path of preserving view corridors is good policy.

Perhaps, just as it is not good policy to let instances such as what happened to the Old City Hall clock tower happen again. It all depends on what one's priorities are.

AoD

 

[greenleaf]

It all depends on what one's priorities are.

Thanks for the thoughtful reply AoD.

While I am all for the preservation of buildings and/or facades (that's another can of worms, I won't go further about that!), I see preserving view corridors as a non-starter, like trying to stop plate tectonics.

 

[Tewder]

At some point a city just has to decide which view corridors are worth preserving... or creating! It's an aesthetic decision like any other, probably based on heritage considerations in some cases or pure urban planning objectives in others. In Europe the avenues and boulevards often terminate in a grand gesture:

Of course in the past kings or dictators could easily stamp their vision on the seat of their empire:

Modern governments add their mark too:

New York:

We have a few notable ones left in Toronto. Why not preserve them? Spadina Crescent:

University Avenue north to Queen's Park:

A prime example of a wasted opportunity for a strong view terminus south on University:

View corridors are about 'grand gestures' and as we know this is not Toronto's forte. Still, repairing streets and roads and planting trees etc are not among Toronto's fortes lately either so maybe it's just a matter of lack of attention or concern for the streetscapes that surround us.

 

[khris]

I love view termini, but there is no reason you can't build behind that view. Just like the New York City example shown above!

 

[Conrad Black]

A prime example of a wasted opportunity for a strong view terminus south on University:

Shangri-La will fill that one in.

 

[CityPlaceN1]

I love view termini, but there is no reason you can't build behind that view. Just like the New York City example shown above!

A lot of New Yorkers hate that one.

 

[Archivist]

Yeah, it's always funny to me when the New York example gets cited, because the Pan Am building (or whatever it is now) is more commonly cited as an example of something that never should have been allowed to proceed. Given that it's slightly off centre to the station, it's a major insult to the city, a huge "we don't care" to everyone with eyes.

 

[Evan]

Yeah, it's always funny to me when the New York example gets cited, because the Pan Am building (or whatever it is now) is more commonly cited as an example of something that never should have been allowed to proceed. Given that it's slightly off centre to the station, it's a major insult to the city, a huge "we don't care" to everyone with eyes.

Pretty soon you can forget about Manhatten view corrdidors. The classic view of Woolworths from the Brookln Bridge will bite the dust in favour of a huge Gehry scraper, the most gorgeous of his yet.

 

[Tewder]

I agree that you can add to a view terminus if it actually 'adds' something. This has become one of the newer 'postcard' views of Toronto:

To build and design without being aware of this sort of context, however, is obnoxious.

Another view terminus added to:

 

[Archivist]

Tewder, those are great examples. The view of St. Mary's Church on Bathurst is also quite fine, though wasted on the traffic funnel that is Adelaide. It seems almost perverse to have Adelaide be a one way street facing away from the church at that point, guaranteeing that few see the vista.

 

[CityPlaceN1]

Great examples Tewder.

 

[p5connex]

I noticed a recent view terminus when you approach the city from the west-end along Dundas St. - the terminus happens to be a condo tower, but a terminus nonetheless -

p5

 

[Uncle Teddy]

Tewder, those are great examples. The view of St. Mary's Church on Bathurst is also quite fine, though wasted on the traffic funnel that is Adelaide. It seems almost perverse to have Adelaide be a one way street facing away from the church at that point, guaranteeing that few see the vista.

Vu is starting to become one at Jarvis and Adelaide.

 

[Urban Shocker]

John Street certainly provided The Grange with a handsome approach road when it was built.

Pure Spirit, built where an early Gooderham ( or Worts? ) villa stood in the mid-19th century, updates the flatiron-as-view-terminus idea at the east end of the Esplanade.

 

[urbandreamer]

Perhaps one of UT's graphics wizards could take the rendering for this proposal, and taking a shot of the "view corridor" create a before and after image to show the impact?