Lyphe

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 18, 2013
Messages
333
Reaction score
314
Wow.

With some of the *other recent disappointments in the city, at least they've redeemed themselves somewhat with a decent crown ( the others that is ).
But this ... oh no.
 
Last edited:

bjrkz

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 14, 2019
Messages
56
Reaction score
150
It's amazing how poorly Toronto's waterfront is developing compared to other world class cities like Vancouver and New York. Yes, the industries are different in each city, but this project exemplifies how Toronto's becoming a product of cheap looking buildings due to very little developer regulations. I'm also not sure if Giannone Petricone knows how to work within a budget or understands the materials they work with, judging from their past projects and comparing the renderings to the final built form. I had high hopes for the pedestrian space here, and I'm aware that it isn't complete, but it looks like an excessively paved-over mess with little character. Unfortunately developers have defined Toronto's architecture by balcony patterns, overly-designed mechanical penthouses, and window wall, and architects are being forced to use a copy-paste method of designing the city.

In general, I question the expertise of Waterfront Toronto and city planners based on how poorly designed commercialized and residential spaces have been allowed to develop right up to the lakefront, creating a disconnected waterfront path. The amount of paved surfaces and the lack of green spaces with large trees shows how little investment and care goes into the public realm. IMO, the Music Garden and Trillium Park are the best public park projects along the waterfront but it's far too little.

Even though this building isn't right on the waterfront, it's another example of how developers invest little in architectural design and the public spaces around the site. Yeah I've heard it all, construction costs are high, the planning guidelines states this, bIah blah blah. If there's any hope for the waterfront and the rest of the city, it's time to heavily regulate developers to prevent things like paving over the entire property, slapping up curtain wall, window wall or precast and calling it a day.
 
Last edited:

UtakataNoAnnex

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
3,858
Reaction score
5,207
Mostly misses. It’s terrible at every angle.
Personally, I like to see more hits than misses. So don't get me wrong here...

...but with this crown 'n beige finishing, I'll admit it's going into the Herb Tarlek suit direction. 🤮
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
15,295
Reaction score
15,602
City:
Toronto
They just finished (well, almost finished) the new sidewalks on all sides. They have planted trees on the west (Lower Jarvis) side but NONE on the east (Richardson) side, though the sidewalks are certainly wide enough. Did someone screw up or is it yet another example of how the City's 'plant more trees' mantra is ignored.
 

jje1000

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
4,844
Reaction score
2,342
Personally, I like to see more hits than misses. So don't get me wrong here...

...but with this crown 'n beige finishing, I'll admit it's going into the Herb Tarlek suit direction. 🤮
The concept of the inner street is a good urbanistic touch that's better than something like Home (Power + Adelaide), but the problem is with the towers, which are completely unavoidable from any distance.

Again, these towers pretend to be all modern glass-towers while really being punched-window buildings in reality. The crown cladding is awful, and I don't know why they didn't copy the stripped patterning of the balcony glass, which they depicted in the marketing renderings:

9513-79246.jpg


It's amazing how poorly Toronto's waterfront is developing compared to other world class cities like Vancouver and New York. Yes, the industries are different in each city, but this project exemplifies how Toronto's becoming a product of cheap looking buildings due to very little developer regulations. I'm also not sure if Giannone Petricone knows how to work within a budget or understands the materials they work with, judging from their past projects and comparing the renderings to the final built form. I had high hopes for the pedestrian space here, and I'm aware that it isn't complete, but it looks like an excessively paved-over mess with little character. Unfortunately developers have defined Toronto's architecture by balcony patterns, overly-designed mechanical penthouses, and window wall, and architects are being forced to use a copy-paste method of designing the city.

Agreed- the product of a punched-window buildings being dressed up in an all-glass aesthetic, with spandrel covering what should be glass + the extensive use of wrap-around balconies seems to be almost an uniquely Toronto sort of architecture.

A negative architectural style, if one should say- it's like modernist aesthetics are being worn like a flayed skin, with the idea of uncluttered lines and the emphasis on quality of materiality having long been discarded.

I definitely hope to see an academic analysis of this style in the future, and an examination of its lineage and evolution.
 
Last edited:

WislaHD

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 21, 2013
Messages
9,871
Reaction score
9,156
When I opened this page and saw the latest photos, I initially thought this was the Daniels site in Mississauga when I saw the crown.

You can only imagine the disgust on my face when I realize this was the Waterfront site.
 

busybeaver

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 23, 2012
Messages
35
Reaction score
59
the landscaping doesn't really work either. I knew the sugar beach extension wouldn't work .. even from the rendering. it's sterile and unpleasant being next to cars zooming by or idling at Jarvis and QueenQuay. the weeping willows are pretty much dead.. one looks like it's ready to fall over. #designfail
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
15,295
Reaction score
15,602
City:
Toronto
Interesting to re-read the WT DRPs comments in 2014!

1.5 Summary of the Panel’s Key Issues
The Acting Chair then summarized the recommendations of the Panel:
• Study and provide more detail on Sugar Beach “north”.
• Study that the microclimate of “the yard” and ground plane treatment ensure pedestrian comfort. • Refine the material palette through “Radical rigour”
• Study how such an eclectic program can be expressed in one building or family of architecture without being monolithic
• Present the overall sustainability strategy at the next meeting including further information on the envelope and energy performance

From: https://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/nbe...&CACHEID=0d987cd1-c1ef-4759-92e2-034818e8fb27

Not sure if it ever came back for Round 2 at the DRP, their documents are hard to find on WT website.

UPDATE: The City tells me that there are no trees on Richardson because there is a gas main below sidewalk. One might have thought it could be moved to be under the road but ....
 
Last edited:

TheKingEast

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 16, 2011
Messages
6,327
Reaction score
3,672
It's amazing how poorly Toronto's waterfront is developing compared to other world class cities like Vancouver and New York. Yes, the industries are different in each city, but this project exemplifies how Toronto's becoming a product of cheap looking buildings due to very little developer regulations. I'm also not sure if Giannone Petricone knows how to work within a budget or understands the materials they work with, judging from their past projects and comparing the renderings to the final built form. I had high hopes for the pedestrian space here, and I'm aware that it isn't complete, but it looks like an excessively paved-over mess with little character. Unfortunately developers have defined Toronto's architecture by balcony patterns, overly-designed mechanical penthouses, and window wall, and architects are being forced to use a copy-paste method of designing the city.

In general, I question the expertise of Waterfront Toronto and city planners based on how poorly designed commercialized and residential spaces have been allowed to develop right up to the lakefront, creating a disconnected waterfront path. The amount of paved surfaces and the lack of green spaces with large trees shows how little investment and care goes into the public realm. IMO, the Music Garden and Trillium Park are the best public park projects along the waterfront but it's far too little.

Even though this building isn't right on the waterfront, it's another example of how developers invest little in architectural design and the public spaces around the site. Yeah I've heard it all, construction costs are high, the planning guidelines states this, bIah blah blah. If there's any hope for the waterfront and the rest of the city, it's time to heavily regulate developers to prevent things like paving over the entire property, slapping up curtain wall, window wall or precast and calling it a day.

Agreed 100%. I have complained about the waterfront for years and looks like I’ll sadly be right. A complete failure. This is some shameful work. Brown spandrel along the waterfront? How? Why? This doesn't even live up to the work they did in Regent Park.
 

tripwire

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 28, 2015
Messages
703
Reaction score
828
It is pretty sad that the Lighthouse towers do look worse than some of the Regent Park towers they've done.

  • Sugar Beach "North" may still have potential once the patio comes out (hopefully that's still going to happen with Eataly there).
  • Yard is still open - it'll really depend on the cover and lighting they use
About the best thing I can say is that the sidewalk is much wider and prettier than before.
 

Top