Toronto Model 03-03-20 110 Adelaide E.png
 
smably said:
First impressions: love the arches, love the colour, love the metal balcony guards.
Click to expand...
Don't forget. These are RENDERINGS and we all know (or should know) they are not necessarily what will actually be built. Lots of time for The Cheapening and if I were you I would keep my excitement down a bit.
 
A 42-storey building sticking out like a sore thumb midblock doesn't look like good urban form to me.
 
there is another proposal submitted recently that is 149m and very close to this one and i think there will be more in the few years.

Celeste Condominiums | 137m | 40s | Alterra | Sweeny &Co

Not a bad building to keep, but the sidewalk is rather narrow there, and the area would benefit from more space at the intersection. Furthermore, it’s a relatively simple structure that has fewer details that could be lost if rebuilt (i.e. brickwork). As such, I wonder if it would make more...
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
 
condovo said:
A 42-storey building sticking out like a sore thumb midblock doesn't look like good urban form to me.
Click to expand...
Dunno, everything west of this proposal all the way to Church St. is atrocious crap that should be demolished.
 
What a gorgeous looking building! A change from all those blue, green, black and white buildings being built . I think this building complements the church and Park across the street. As you can see in the photos from the previous page with its earth tone colours etc.
 
Last edited:
I'm seeing red... in a good way.

Can't see a St. James view corridor issue (the proposal is east enough, and if you use a wide angle anywhere downtown you'll might be adding stuff to the frame).

The early placeholder render says red (hoping for brick or brick "adjacent") and the building could use some rethinks (no unresolved mechanical boxes any more please), but I like the location/massing for this.

Paid for and approved by the Committee for more red (and yellow) masonry downtown.

Red/yellow are the new black/grey.
 
Is approval of this project a "slam dunk"? How much do public comments count? IMHO, not a bad looking building overall, but the height seems grossly excessive for the immediate environs. Especially the historical structures.
 
tbone said:
Is approval of this project a "slam dunk"? How much do public comments count? IMHO, not a bad looking building overall, but the height seems grossly excessive for the immediate environs. Especially the historical structures.
Click to expand...
No, it's not a slam dunk. @condovo's concerns as per above will likely be mirrored at the City. Public comments do count to a degree, (assuming they are reasonable and find a sympathetic, similarly aligned ear at the City), so watch for chances to participate in the feedback.

42
 
One wonders, given the Coronavirus situation - and uncertainties over the length and depth of the associated economic slowdown - whether developers in the early stages of approval for such projects will put things on hold until the situation "shakes out". Seems that moving ahead with large projects, which take years to come to fruition in the best of times, just became much riskier.
 
tbone said:
One wonders, given the Coronavirus situation - and uncertainties over the length and depth of the associated economic slowdown - whether developers in the early stages of approval for such projects will put things on hold until the situation "shakes out". Seems that moving ahead with large projects, which take years to come to fruition in the best of times, just became much riskier.
Click to expand...
It's because of those long timelines that developers don't often worry about economic downturns, unless they suspect they will be long term.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top