Northern Light
Superstar
This one will be back at the Design Review Panel, tomorrow:
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
Just taking a quick look at the DRP presentation right now:
First change I note is to the corner of Elm/Simcoe, note the narrowing, also, the addition of a bike lane/cycle track on Elm:
Meanwhile they also change the relationship of the elevated space under the soffit to Elm:
Along University on the southern side they've added more seating and public art:
Looking from the corner of University and Elm:
City questions for the panel:
Panel Discussion:
Overwhelmingly supportive of the changes made from the first iteration. A strong sense that the changes on the Elm frontage were particularly good and the shifting of the ramp was the right choice.
Positive comments were also made in respect of the materiality between new and old on the podium (or extant tower) levels.
Minor questions/critiques surround the way in which the plaza/portico area will be programmed, wind mitigation for same, mezzanine program, and how to treat the tower level soffit.
The panel voted support.
The presentation can be found here, its the first one up:
First change I note is to the corner of Elm/Simcoe, note the narrowing, also, the addition of a bike lane/cycle track on Elm:
Meanwhile they also change the relationship of the elevated space under the soffit to Elm:
Along University on the southern side they've added more seating and public art:
Looking from the corner of University and Elm:
City questions for the panel:
Panel Discussion:
Overwhelmingly supportive of the changes made from the first iteration. A strong sense that the changes on the Elm frontage were particularly good and the shifting of the ramp was the right choice.
Positive comments were also made in respect of the materiality between new and old on the podium (or extant tower) levels.
Minor questions/critiques surround the way in which the plaza/portico area will be programmed, wind mitigation for same, mezzanine program, and how to treat the tower level soffit.
The panel voted support.
The presentation can be found here, its the first one up:
Last edited:
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Link, @Northern Light?
Northern Light
Superstar
I have edited my post to add the link at the end.
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
I like that a lot better.
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Much better design
70Challenger
Active Member
It's so great to see them improve the design based on feedback. No more objections from me.
A resubmission following the Design Review Panel presentation from above is now at the City, and we have a story up looking at all the changes!
Here's a close-up of the new plan for you. Scroll away!
I have to say that I love this reworking of the plan. If this classic has to have a new tower on top, this is the way to go!
42
Here's a close-up of the new plan for you. Scroll away!
I have to say that I love this reworking of the plan. If this classic has to have a new tower on top, this is the way to go!
42
dougtoronto
New Member
Okay Modernist revival!
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
...now that's a continental breakfast served with some smexy sauce. <3
mferna
Active Member
Read our latest article featuring updates about this development here: https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2024/0...reworked-522-university-avenue-proposal.56759
xy3
Active Member
Im sure theyll be a loud contingent ignoring the preservation effort and bitching about height
CanadianNational
Senior Member
Light years above and beyond the initial proposal. I have to say, I'm impressed - usually we don't get this kind of improvement based on feedback.
This is a pretty deft handling of what could have been a monumental screw-up. Good to see.
This is a pretty deft handling of what could have been a monumental screw-up. Good to see.
rdaner
Senior Member
Reminds me of 88 Queen.
Doppleganger
Active Member
Now this is much more like it! Kudos to all involved! Rather than saving 60% of the original building, they could easily have gone the standard route of facadism(similar to the United Building). At any rate, it's certainly a terrific example of how the DRP process need not be adversarial. Here's hoping that the 'c' word, ahem, 'collaboration', becomes the rule rather than the exception in cases like this!
Last edited: