caltrane74
Senior Member
This has got to be a singular exception to the rule.
This has got to be a singular exception to the rule.
k10ery
Senior Member
I was thinking of the podium on the new building. Not faux historical, but remarkably sensitive to the GA Building. That's what I'd like to see more often.
Ramako
Moderator
I'd like to see podiums that are sensitive to neighbouring historical buildings without being poor replicas of them, as that only serves to disrespect them and confuse our architectural evolution. I think 60 Colborne handled it best: The orange podium with its arched entry ways does a good job of referencing the low rise brick row across the street without trying to mimic them or pretend it was built in their era.
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Just now from the Aura Webcam
I know i keep posting these but for once i have a decent reason: Take a look at the western half of the north wall of aura...the part with no balconies...it looks sleek and reflective and the mess of mullions seems to work once theres a large uninterrupted pattern visible. Im sure many will disagree with me, but it seems that the more cladding i see the less messy it looks
I know i keep posting these but for once i have a decent reason: Take a look at the western half of the north wall of aura...the part with no balconies...it looks sleek and reflective and the mess of mullions seems to work once theres a large uninterrupted pattern visible. Im sure many will disagree with me, but it seems that the more cladding i see the less messy it looks
caltrane74
Senior Member
That open area next to the park, between the Old College Park building and Aura, will become a serious people place in a few more months. Can't wait.
However it might be too cold for it to get really hopping this year, but next year summer. Might be alright.
However it might be too cold for it to get really hopping this year, but next year summer. Might be alright.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
Those long balconies look so tiny and insignificant compared to this massive tower's bulk.
caltrane74
Senior Member
by me
BrianSolo
UT Member
In my opinion, the more this building grows, the better it looks. The neighbouring historic buildings are all so different from each other, I'm not sure how Aura could be more sensitive to them. And if it were, which style would it be sensitive to? I'd be surprised if they didn't all soon have high-rises poking through the top of their facades.
bmiller
Active Member
That old stretch of Yonge needs a makeover, and Aura is in the forefront. Others are following, with applications that will add to the regeneration. Hopefully they will be diverse in their
design. There is room for improvement on the design of the other proposals, like the 2 towers at 501 Yonge which are nothing to write home about. Lots of time for change on those two.
Massey is trying and somewhat succeeding, and so is 1 Bloor. The new Bloor west tower is looking good. Time is still on the side of design. Money is another thing.
design. There is room for improvement on the design of the other proposals, like the 2 towers at 501 Yonge which are nothing to write home about. Lots of time for change on those two.
Massey is trying and somewhat succeeding, and so is 1 Bloor. The new Bloor west tower is looking good. Time is still on the side of design. Money is another thing.
Miscreant
Senior Member
Awesome shot. I love how this upper part of the building is recessed; it adds nice density without crowding the street.
wopchop
Building Toronto
It's quite amazing how different this building makes that whole area feel. It's just so .... huge, at a corner that just isn't.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
It will in about four or five months... oh will it!
caltrane74
Senior Member
A shot of the mall
urbandreamer
recession proof
^It looks like one of those dreary suburban office parks.
That's the difference between good and bad architecture.
That's the difference between good and bad architecture.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
A bit off topic, just south of Aura.....the city is recomending refusing the application to erect a new sign on top of that heritage bldg. at 378 Yonge street.(S/W corner of Gerrard-Yonge)
PB11.1 ACTION
... Ward:27
Alteration of a Heritage Property Designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act - 378 Yonge Street
Origin
(April 12, 2012) Report from Director, Urban Design, City Planning
Recommendations
The City Planning Division recommends that:
1. City Council refuse the proposed signage application for the heritage property at 378 Yonge Street under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act.
2. If the owner appeals City Council's decision to refuse the application for alteration under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, City Council authorize the City Solicitor and the necessary City staff to attend at the Conservation Review Board hearing in opposition to the appeal.
Summary
This report recommends that City Council refuse the proposed alteration of the designated heritage property located at 378 Yonge Street (Attachment 1) which consists of new large format signage construction on the roof.
The application to erect an assembly of three large third party signs is supported by the document entitled Bright Lights – Big City: A Signage Vision for the Downtown Yonge Strip (Signage Vision), which provides guidelines for large format signage design along the section of Yonge Street south of Gerrard Street to Queen Street. While roof signs are generally prohibited under Chapter 694, Signs, General, and third party signs are prohibited on all heritage properties within the City, the subject property is located within the section of Yonge Street intended for special consideration, to be guided by the Signage Vision document.
Please refer to the link below to review the Signage Vision Document:
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/downtownyongesignage.htm
The proposed signage would replace an existing sign with three new sign faces that would create a volume equal in height to the ground floor of the heritage building (24 feet). The width of the Yonge Street elevation of the signage feature corresponds to the width of the building minus a minimal setback (1-1/2 feet on north and south, 1 2/3 feet on east), making it roughly 25 feet wide. The north face of the sign construction is proposed to be approximately 23 feet wide and the southerly elevation is about 18 feet wide.
Background Information
(April 12, 2012) Report from the Director, Urban Design, City Planning - Alteration of a Heritage Property Designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act - 378 Yonge Street
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-46527.pdf)
By: rdaner
PB11.1 ACTION
... Ward:27
Alteration of a Heritage Property Designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act - 378 Yonge Street
Origin
(April 12, 2012) Report from Director, Urban Design, City Planning
Recommendations
The City Planning Division recommends that:
1. City Council refuse the proposed signage application for the heritage property at 378 Yonge Street under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act.
2. If the owner appeals City Council's decision to refuse the application for alteration under Section 33 of the Ontario Heritage Act, City Council authorize the City Solicitor and the necessary City staff to attend at the Conservation Review Board hearing in opposition to the appeal.
Summary
This report recommends that City Council refuse the proposed alteration of the designated heritage property located at 378 Yonge Street (Attachment 1) which consists of new large format signage construction on the roof.
The application to erect an assembly of three large third party signs is supported by the document entitled Bright Lights – Big City: A Signage Vision for the Downtown Yonge Strip (Signage Vision), which provides guidelines for large format signage design along the section of Yonge Street south of Gerrard Street to Queen Street. While roof signs are generally prohibited under Chapter 694, Signs, General, and third party signs are prohibited on all heritage properties within the City, the subject property is located within the section of Yonge Street intended for special consideration, to be guided by the Signage Vision document.
Please refer to the link below to review the Signage Vision Document:
http://www.toronto.ca/planning/downtownyongesignage.htm
The proposed signage would replace an existing sign with three new sign faces that would create a volume equal in height to the ground floor of the heritage building (24 feet). The width of the Yonge Street elevation of the signage feature corresponds to the width of the building minus a minimal setback (1-1/2 feet on north and south, 1 2/3 feet on east), making it roughly 25 feet wide. The north face of the sign construction is proposed to be approximately 23 feet wide and the southerly elevation is about 18 feet wide.
Background Information
(April 12, 2012) Report from the Director, Urban Design, City Planning - Alteration of a Heritage Property Designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act - 378 Yonge Street
(http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2012/pb/bgrd/backgroundfile-46527.pdf)