The DRP needs to shred this proposal to pieces, and be as vicious in their criticism as possible. As it currently stands, this proposal is nothing but absolute trash to the fullest level and would be the worst designed building along Queen's Quay (and that's a tough competition to win as there is a lot of filth along the waterfront).
 
Build this instead. It was proposed for Bayside and designed by ODA New York. aA's monolith looks worse than worst massing model I've ever seen (and it's an actual design?).

This would obviously complement AquaLuna.

90

https://newatlas.com/oda-new-york-bayside/42279/

It even follows the sun...
 
It is maybe worth re-reading (or, in my case, reading) the DRP comments from the initial presentation in July 2019. The summary reads:

4.3 Consensus Comments The chair then summarized the Panel comments on which there was full agreement.
Building
• The Panel felt comfortable with the proposed modifications to the street-wall datum in finding a consistent height, and rotation of the west tower massing to align with podium
• Consider setting back the upper podium floors of 162 Queens Quay East (that abut the property line with 178 QQE) westward to create a visual gap between the two podiums and thus clearly define the consistent lower podium street-wall height
• Consider opportunities for combining, consolidating, and sharing parking ramps, loading and servicing areas between the various buildings
Landscape
• Explore options for the treatment of the future east-west street – consider severing it at the north-south P.O.P.S. with a green strip that has views down to the water, eliminate traffic through street, and encourage stronger pedestrian use as a common outdoor “lobby” for the various residential entrances.
• Consider shifting northeast lobby to the future east-west street, or provide corridor access from Sherbourne Street, to support the street-wall condition that is consistent with 215 Lake Shore Boulevard East.
• Consider alternatives to rolled curb-edge detail
• Consider mapping the emerging network of east-west pedestrian connections and identify opportunities for continuity
Sustainability
• Provide more information and explore improvements in sustainability strategy
• Explore feasibility of building to tier 2 or 3 TGS standards

More details of their presentation in the Minutes on WT website.
 
I agree that the massing is fine (just a small increase from the AOR), but here's a radical idea: throw some curves into the thing. ↩

Maybe aA fired the staff that dared to curve the ICE twins... can't think of very many other aA examples outside the box. 🔲
 
From the link above.

One of those cases where elevation drawings look marginally better than the dreadful renderings. Was secretly hoping the "minor variance" was a bit more major... but... zzzzz.

180QQ-north.png

180QQ-south.png

Link
 
Took me a bit to find this thread again! (no pin on map)....

Application is in to lift the 'H' (hold) on the lands.

1643101597904.png



While No docs are up for this new app; there are details below attached to the previous subdivision app from 2017:


From the Cover Letter, dated Nov 16/21 (Nov 23 u/l to City website):

1643101274927.png

1643101312806.png

1643101338042.png

1643101375181.png

1643101451878.png


Additional details in letter.
 

Back
Top