[salsa]

Inconsistency is a major issue with this building. Every elevation makes multiple exceptions to its own rule, and there are competing patterns and themes and colour sets at work here. It's just an inconsistent mish-mash, which is unfortunate since consistency is incredibly important in a neo-modernist design like this. Some huge missteps here, when they could have just kept it simple and created something understated yet attractive. And the window-wall is brutal.

Tridel should look to Manhattan to see what consistency looks like.

 

[atodaso]

Tridel should look to Manhattan to see what consistency looks like.

(Retract - wrong thread - thought I was in '177-197 Front St E' thread- oops)
At least there is some elegance to the severity of these. But still, Front and Sherbourne is a residential area, the towers you refer to here would fit nowhere else but in the heart of the CBD

 

[salsa]

At least there is some elegance to the severity of these. But still, Front and Sherbourne is a residential area, the towers you refer to here would fit nowhere else but in the heart of the CBD

I'm not saying Toronto needs to build exactly like that, especially not that big. However a few days in NYC makes me realize just how crappy Toronto's architecture (and public realm) is, with all the repetitive and uninspiring glass and spandrel clad buildings.

Also, it's Front and John not Sherbourne.

 

[dt_toronto_geek]

Excuse my untimely reply (6 years late), but scarberiankhatru made a good point. Residents of this location will not be needing access to Union Station, so it's a bit of a redundancy to locate condos in the heart of the CBD like this. Besides, who would want to live in the CBD which is a non-neighbourhood and completely dead outside of business and rush hours. It's short term planning.

This is a four minute walk to King Street with plenty of activity, an eight minute walk to Queen Street, more activity, ten minutes to the lake - I think this is a great location, and not very noisy at night either. When condos go up in or near vibrant areas people start screaming at the local Councillor about the noise at night as if they didn't know where they were buying into. It's all about what location works for people, or how stupid they are.

 

[atodaso]

I'm not saying Toronto needs to build exactly like that, especially not that big. However a few days in NYC makes me realize just how crappy Toronto's architecture (and public realm) is, with all the repetitive and uninspiring glass and spandrel clad buildings.

Also, it's Front and John not Sherbourne.

Oops - I was in the wrong thread - I retract my comment. This site would indeed have suited a more urbane building.

 

[interchange42]

Residents of this location will not be needing access to Union Station, so it's a bit of a redundancy to locate condos in the heart of the CBD like this. Besides, who would want to live in the CBD which is a non-neighbourhood and completely dead outside of business and rush hours. It's short term planning.

You are wrong about the CBD being "completely dead" outside of business hours, and you are wrong about this being short term planning to address that. There are lots of residents in the area now, even closer to the core than this building is, and more are coming. Lots of people want to live right Downtown, and they have already begun to make it livelier. Having condos sprinkled about between the office towers makes a lot of sense.

42

 

[JasonParis]

You are wrong about the CBD being "completely dead" outside of business hours, and you are wrong about this being short term planning to address that. There are lots of residents in the area now, even closer to the core than this building is, and more are coming. Lots of people want to live right Downtown, and they have already begun to make it livelier. Having condos sprinkled about between the office towers makes a lot of sense.
42

It's technically not even the CBD anyway. It's the "Entertainent District" which is one of the hottest condo markets in the world. It's never dead and is increasingly less dead by the year.

 

[atodaso]

You are wrong about the CBD being "completely dead" outside of business hours, and you are wrong about this being short term planning to address that. There are lots of residents in the area now, even closer to the core than this building is, and more are coming. Lots of people want to live right Downtown, and they have already begun to make it livelier. Having condos sprinkled about between the office towers makes a lot of sense.

42

It's technically not even the CBD anyway. It's the "Entertainent District" which is one of the hottest condo markets in the world. It's never dead and is increasingly less dead by the year.

I'm referring to the 'Bay Street' district. The wind-blown canyons of commerce. The very core - south of King except along Bay where it extends roughly up to Queen, east of BJW, and west of Yonge ~ roughly. The 'Entertainment District' is north and west of here. You are right, it's not completely dead outside of business hours, it does cater somewhat to the evening bay street crowd so there are a few bars and restaurants. And a few corporate chain tourist spots on Front to capture the CN tower - convention - Stadium crowds.

But a neighbourhood it is not.

 

[atodaso]

While this site is technically in the entertainment district (but not the entertainment/condo district) - the two collide right here, but it still has mostly characteristics of the CBD. My main point here is that it's close to Union Station and the Path System. This is where the CBD should grow, and will have to grow. Building a semi-crappy condo tower here is short term thinking. In fact if the site were vacant right now, I am certain nobody would propose this project. It would most likely be commercial.

 

[SP!RE]

I live adjacent to the Financial District and have to cross through it to get most places on a daily basis, and I can vouch for the fact that the CBD is very quiet outside of business hours and weekdays. Downtown as a whole remains lively, but the Financial District can get very quiet. That said, I never feel unsafe, and it's pretty neat to feel like you have it to yourself sometimes.

I think it's great to mix residential and commercial, even in a city's CBD, but it is disappointing to see the higher-calibre, high-budget commercial feel of the CBD eroded by poorly conceived residential projects. It's not the fact that residential buildings are invading previously commercial districts that's a problem (quite the opposite)-- it's the poor quality, window-wall designs that are so grating next to dignified office buildings.

 

[atodaso]

True, something like the Ritz looks at home in this area - but when cityplace-grade buildings start to encroach it becomes an uneasy mix.

 

[interchange42]

You're mixing urban planning with exterior architectural expression and materials. I'm talking about urban planning, and adding residences to the core is not short term planning. Several residential buildings are on the way, and it's going to significantly add to the liveliness of the area.

42

 

[atodaso]

You're mixing urban planning with exterior architectural expression and materials. I'm talking about urban planning, and adding residences to the core is not short term planning. Several residential buildings are on the way, and it's going to significantly add to the liveliness of the area.

42

That was an aside. I'm talking about uses.
How can you add to the residential liveliness of the area when all or most of the buildings are commercial towers, and all or most of the business cater to business workers? This will never have a neighbourhood feel - it can't. It's the CBD.

 

[JasonParis]

You're mixing urban planning with exterior architectural expression and materials. I'm talking about urban planning, and adding residences to the core is not short term planning. Several residential buildings are on the way, and it's going to significantly add to the liveliness of the area.
42

Indeed, you'll probably even see parts of the PATH (particularly around/under Union Station and perhaps First Canadian) open on weekends within the coming decade.

 

[interchange42]

That was an aside. I'm talking about uses.
How can you add to the residential liveliness of the area when all or most of the buildings are commercial towers, and all or most of the business cater to business workers? This will never have a neighbourhood feel - it can't. It's the CBD.

You present your argument about the nature of the business in the area as if it's a given that all of the businesses are of a particular type with no appeal for people living there, but you offer no explanation by way of proof. My contention is that as more residents move into the area, more businesses will cater to their needs. Any that don't are fools. Besides, it's not like the business people and residents are two different animals with diametrically opposed needs; any given store or restaurant should be able to cater to whatever market or market niche they care to, and there's no reason to believe that commercial establishments en masse will ignore the needs of a growing residential market.

In regards to whether or not the area is a neighbourhood, it will never have the same feel as a tree-lined bay and gable street, but it's very narrow to assume that everyone wants to live on one of those streets. Those buying in Toronto's core understand the local building typology—and by moving to the area they are making it their neighbourhood, even if you do not recognize it as such.

42