UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
You are missing the visual appeal from your equation. Telling folks there is a need to tear down something that looks good is never going to sell.
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
cd concept
Senior Member
The way I see things is any building or its facade of any decade should be preserved. If it sets a presence in its location in having some form of character with detailed cladding etc. Not because it's a knock off of something from the past. This building blends in with the art deco style building next to it. We have so many modern glass skyscrapers in this city. And we don't need two more in this location. If anything they should be creating a tower that blends in to what we have already! One day they'll be tearing down the Royal Bank because it's had its days for something cheap looking !
Last edited:
urbanexplorer
Active Member
Who is “we”?
DSC
Superstar
The St Lawrence community.
Ward8
Active Member
"Merit" from a design standpoint, no. But there is probably embodied carbon merit. This building also draws attention to how bad all glass street walls are. The only money they put into the building is on the ground floor and I literally never noticed the EIFS until it was mentioned in this thread. Architecture above the second floor is overrated. The fact that the new building would be a step down is a red flag.
urbanexplorer
Active Member
I live in the St Lawrence community so it certainly wasn't everyone in the neighbourhood. And there was a post about this in the St Lawrence community FB group where hundreds of people have indicated they do not like the design/did not get a chance to give feedback.
So it feels a bit deceptive to just say "the St Lawrence community" overall shaped this design.
DSC
Superstar
Do you seriously expect everyone to like anything? Look at the views expressed here on virtually every proposal by generally reasonable people. That said, the St Lawrence Neighbourhood Assn and the residents at 55 The Esplanade immediately next door certainly worked with the developer to improve the proposals for 75 The Esplanade, I was only involved very peripherally and I doubt they got everything they wanted but these neighbourhood conversations (in addition to the statutory meetings the City must hold) can really help improve developments. I do not follow the SL Facebook group but if anyone felt they 'did not get a chance to give feedback" they were not paying attention.
urbanexplorer
Active Member
Don't put words in my mouth. I wanted to know who specifically gave feedback on this project already from the community - what the selection criteria was.
You're (dismissive) comment about "the st lawrence community" wasn't really accurate was it because as you've further clarified (and since answered my original question) it was only people who are members of the SLNA and the neighbours in the building at 55 Esplanade.
Personally, I want to know how to impact developments like this from in the future while also pointing all my neighbours in the right direction.
Northern Light
Superstar
Turn down the temperature please.
DSC is a very valuable member of this forum, and long time contributor. Further, his answer was not misleading, members of the SLNA and neighbours of the development in question are in fact members of the St. Lawrence community.
Working groups cannot and never will be dozens or hundreds of people.
They will be representatives of stakeholder groups, such as the SNLA or the BIA; and perhaps a small number of individuals who make a compelling case to join.
****
Development can always be influenced outside that process by participating in statutory public meetings; by writing/speaking to the planner on the file, or communicating directly with the developer.
That information on projects is available both through the City and in most applicable threads here at UT.
UT is probably your single best source, on average, to know about developments before they become more broadly public; however, in the St. Lawrence Community, being actively involved with the SLNA is a great
way to keep up on neighbourhood happenings.
I think you would find there are few people better placed to help you in your quest to keep informed, and contribute than @DSC .
****
On this development; you have this thread.
In the title of the thread, you have the name of the developer; "Republic", you can 'watch' this thread for new developments and you can choose to reach out to Republic who happen to be a member here at UT.
Aside from the SLNA, should you wish to be considered for any working group; that will be organized through the Coucillor's office; and you can reach out to them now and express an interest should such a group be formed
for this development (which it probably will)
The Councillor's contact info is below:
urbanexplorer
Active Member
Oh my bad, I didn't realize DSC was a longtime contributor and a very valuable member, I should have known better. That's on my for not realizing that they were referring to the smaller group of stakeholders - SNLA & 55 Esplanade.
Thanks for all that well-laid out additional info, I'll leverage this when speaking with the members of the community that were feeling like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the proposal.
FormerTorontonianBackInTO
New Member
Respectfully disagree, in that I like the cantilevered podium (makes the area feel more open and walkable than what's currently there), especially the curve in it, and I love the bold choice of color (though I worry that it won't survive). I know a lot of people on this site like the traditional colonnade, and I acknowledge that it looks good on pics, but as someone who lives right next to this building I know that it makes for a dark and unpleasant walking experience (perhaps if the ceiling was higher and the colors less grey/sterile I could learn to appreciate colonnades)
DSC
Superstar
Whether I am valued is certainly up for debate BUT if you live in the St Lawrence area you are (as @Northern Light says) a member of the St Lawrence community and the SLNA meetings are open to ALL members of the community. It may be true to say that there were/are 'members of the community that were feeling like they didn't have an opportunity to influence the proposal.' They had a chance and were either unaware of it or failed to attend either an SLNA meeting or the obligatory public consultation run by the City.
MisterF
Senior Member
A lot of comments in this thread bemoan the long, featureless glass wall that forms the streetscape of the proposed building. It seems to be another implementation of the trend of "clean lines" in architecture. What proponents of this trend fail to appreciate is that engaging streetscapes need granularity and texture. They need something new to look at every few steps as you walk past a building, otherwise it reads as sterile and unwelcoming. These are qualities that 19th and early 20th century streetscapes all over the city have in abundance but more recent streetscapes tend to lack. A long, featureless wall doesn't make an engaging streetscape, even if it's made of glass and has retail behind it. The designers of Mirvish Village get it, the people who designed this building don't.
evandyk
Senior Member
Here is an example of the difference between the two, one on each side of Queen, at Logan.
www.google.ca
Google Maps
Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
www.google.ca
MisterF
Senior Member
I actually think that building creates a fairly good streetscape. Sure it lacks the cornice and brickwork of a lot of the older buildings, but the mass of it is visually broken into smaller parts and the storefronts are narrow. Even if a larger tenant combined multiple storefronts together it would still read as narrow storefronts with granularity at street level. It even has strong sign bands and the retail entrances in alcoves, which are sadly missing from most new buildings.Here is an example of the difference between the two, one on each side of Queen, at Logan.
Google Maps
Find local businesses, view maps and get driving directions in Google Maps.
What I'm talking about is more along the lines of this. The building does have a strong design sense, I'll give it that. But the brick and glass are long, flat expanses, it has no signbands at all, and nothing in the design breaks up the bulk of the building. The fact that it's in the Distillery District makes the contrast with older buildings all the more stark.
Or this, which is a fail on so many levels.