thecharioteer

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 17, 2009
Messages
3,595
Reaction score
3,097
I’m afraid I have to go with the thumbs down crew on this one. Partisans has positioned themselves in the past as severe critics of “developer” architecture, but it’s one thing to be a scold and to design (or over design) a hip restaurant and a sauna in Muskoka, another thing to have the chops to handle a major addition to a significant heritage building. The proposal is like a design from a precocious architecture student, so ham-handed and derivative in its proportions and fenestration, one only wishes that the owner had the budget to hire an architect that knows how to do a sympathetic modernist addition to a beaux-art building. Saying that no one will see it from the street is surely throwing in the towel at this point.
 

ProjectEnd

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
12,923
Reaction score
29,630
giphy.gif
 

CanadianNational

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
1,544
Reaction score
272
City:
Toronto
I really like the Partisans work I've seen in real life (esp. Ravel), and their two tower proposals - but this time....erm, I think I have to side with thecharioteer on this one. The new addition does not look sympathetic, nor even respectful. The original building has a great, reserved sense of style that this addition utterly disregards. It hardly references it, plays off it nor enhances it. I think it's a misfire. It would be an affront if it were any more prominent.
I think it should go back to the drawing board - or even to a different architectural firm, sad to say.
 

xy3

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 5, 2021
Messages
308
Reaction score
375
I’m afraid I have to go with the thumbs down crew on this one. Partisans has positioned themselves in the past as severe critics of “developer” architecture, but it’s one thing to be a scold and to design (or over design) a hip restaurant and a sauna in Muskoka, another thing to have the chops to handle a major addition to a significant heritage building. The proposal is like a design from a precocious architecture student, so ham-handed and derivative in its proportions and fenestration, one only wishes that the owner had the budget to hire an architect that knows how to do a sympathetic modernist addition to a beaux-art building. Saying that no one will see it from the street is surely throwing in the towel at this point.

I agree it needs refinement and dosent respect the heritage structure, but does every new building need to be a contemporary in order to not be heavy handed and derivative? The most grubby (unsympathetic to their surroundings) designs Ive seen in the past 2 decades are all lazy modern designs ; Minto Bathurst, 365 Church, Zigg condos to name a few. The biggest eyesore additions Ive seen usually feature raw concrete columns and oppresive cantilevering; a bad modern design trend.
 
Last edited:

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
9,245
Reaction score
3,452
The grilled mechanical penthouse is terribly ugly. It’s naive to think that no one will see it with so many high-rise buildings downtown. That could have been a beautiful new spire inspired by the existing cupolas.
 

Art Tsai

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Messages
925
Reaction score
2,978
New renderings are updated in the database. The overall building storey count changed from 15 storeys to 21 storeys. The total height changed from 71.30m to 89.45m. Finally, the total unit count proposed changed from 67 units to 127 units.

Rendering is taken from the architectural plan via Rezoning submission.
 

Top