isaidso
Senior Member
Arrrrrggghhh! My interest in it has largely evaporated. Not glass (a plus) but it''s a downer to see 100 high rises go up each year but only 4-5 worth admiring.
Last edited:
- Thread starter AHK
- Start date
Riseth
Senior Member
Still looks fine to me and at least it's something different from all the glass condos in that part of town.
Some vignettes from AUDAX:
It should be noted that AUDAX's instagram has posted the old design with the balconies as recently as last month.
The new visuals for Spadina Adelaide Square have also now included 101 Spadina:
It should be noted that AUDAX's instagram has posted the old design with the balconies as recently as last month.
The new visuals for Spadina Adelaide Square have also now included 101 Spadina:
Northern Light
Superstar
Decision Report, Approval Recommended to the next meeting of TEYCC:
From the above, note some minor height changes, one additional floor, but slightly lower total height:
Note the separation distances below:
Also of note, the development will meet Tier 2 Green Standards.
From the above, note some minor height changes, one additional floor, but slightly lower total height:
Note the separation distances below:
Also of note, the development will meet Tier 2 Green Standards.
This building is solely under Devron Development's wing now, with them having bought out Great Gulf's interest in it.
42
42
Doppleganger
Active Member
One of the changes I might make with this one is adding a step-backed crown, flat or even hipped, to further accentuate the art deco-inspired theme. That flat roof looks a bit too truncated IMO.
Northern Light
Superstar
I'll just park this here:
tstormers
Senior Member
A nice little before demolition shot.
AHK
Senior Member
Starting to see some action. The existing Lorne's store is scheduled to close and relocate to their new site at 320 Queen Street West on September 15.
Rimawi
New Member
Devron developments posted on their Facebook page that they have officially received zoning approval for 101 Spadina. They also mention new renderings to come shortly
artyboy123
Senior Member
New rendering was taken from the architectural plan via SPA. The height changed from 135.48m to 133.95m. The storey changed from 38 to 39 storey. The unit count changed from 375 units to 397 units. The car parking changed from 142 car parking to 147 car parking. Finally, the bike parking increased from 378 bikes to 399 bikes.
AnnetteMeetsJane
Active Member
I know everyone else loves this design, but I just can’t like how the building meets the sidewalk. I do not claim any professional architectural knowledge, but it does seem to me that a distinguishing feature of buildings along Spadina are squared off masonry buildings with windows pierced into the walls. They are solid, honest, sturdy buildings with decorative features that are visually subtle and celebrate the ingenuity and skill from masons and bricklayers who made beauty from uniform, cuboid bricks.
The proposed design is ok, but (to my amateur eye) would be a better fit in the financial district amongst the 1920’s deco ‘scrapers. Visually the building from the third floor upward overreaches its base, making it look top heavy. The shape of the arches look like something from a cathedral rather than the rounded shape that characterizes buildings in the garment district. It’s show-offy and it will break up the line of frontages along the avenue as it will appear to be set back more that its neighbours while still taking up pavement space.
I’ve tried to like it, but I just can’t see what everyone else loves about it… I thought the top was the best bit in the original designs, but that has now changed… am I missing something, or does this just come down to personal taste? At the consultation meeting which I attended on-line the developer made a great deal of proposing a design that fit in with its context, but I just see a building that is trying very hard to not reflect the design motifs of the area. Is the not playing nicely why people like it?
The proposed design is ok, but (to my amateur eye) would be a better fit in the financial district amongst the 1920’s deco ‘scrapers. Visually the building from the third floor upward overreaches its base, making it look top heavy. The shape of the arches look like something from a cathedral rather than the rounded shape that characterizes buildings in the garment district. It’s show-offy and it will break up the line of frontages along the avenue as it will appear to be set back more that its neighbours while still taking up pavement space.
I’ve tried to like it, but I just can’t see what everyone else loves about it… I thought the top was the best bit in the original designs, but that has now changed… am I missing something, or does this just come down to personal taste? At the consultation meeting which I attended on-line the developer made a great deal of proposing a design that fit in with its context, but I just see a building that is trying very hard to not reflect the design motifs of the area. Is the not playing nicely why people like it?
xy3
Active Member
I wish the park was re-oriented to the southeast side of the site, where it'd be protected from the noise and danger of the traffic.
Not only is an unprotected park on such a huge roaring intersection unappealing, but it's a streetwall killer.
People will bring up sunlight, but I personally love the idea of a small shaded pocket park with some seating , ivy, snowball bushes, and a small fountain.
Not only is an unprotected park on such a huge roaring intersection unappealing, but it's a streetwall killer.
People will bring up sunlight, but I personally love the idea of a small shaded pocket park with some seating , ivy, snowball bushes, and a small fountain.
Last edited:
AlbertC
Superstar
Marketing for this has begun:
101spadina.com
Devron Presents: 101 Spadina | Official Website
Submit your information to stay up to date on 101 Spadina
Last edited:
Turner Fleischer is now attached
Last edited: