evandyk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 22, 2019
Messages
1,535
Reaction score
5,373
D21F4DE8-AC54-42DC-A675-D90A5B17D339.jpeg
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
15,295
Reaction score
15,603
City:
Toronto
These towers belong to Scarborough NOT the waterfront
Is the siding (I use the word intentionally) on the crown finished yet? It looks rather cheap now so I suppose it may still need the final Daniels/RAW touch!
 

syn

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
5,293
Reaction score
3,565
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.

Not sure if I agree 100% with the Vancouver comparison - they certainly have their share of junk.

I wonder where the Design Review Panel is in all of this? How is the city approving all of these waterfront disappointments?

We have a once-in-a-generation blank slate and we're completely wasting the opportunity.
 

win3280

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
Not sure if I agree 100% with the Vancouver comparison - they certainly have their share of junk.

I wonder where the Design Review Panel is in all of this? How is the city approving all of these waterfront disappointments?

We have a once-in-a-generation blank slate and we're completely wasting the opportunity.
Excellent comment, I was very disappointed with the design of the building, no pride and cheap look. It said, by the lake but not match at all. It ruins everything and my expectation, totally not close to what I saw from the marketing materials. A failure project indeed.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
15,295
Reaction score
15,603
City:
Toronto
Excellent comment, I was very disappointed with the design of the building, no pride and cheap look. It said, by the lake but not match at all. It ruins everything and my expectation, totally not close to what I saw from the marketing materials. A failure project indeed.
Though I absolutely agree that this building (or complex) is a great disappointment, it is not fair to blame the City (or in this case the Waterfront) Design Review Panel for what is there. Under the Planning Act, the City can (at least in theory) deal with issues of height and density but cannot deal with aesthetics or cheapness. (I say 'in theory" because, as we know all too well, even the City's best efforts in areas it is, supposedly, in charge of can be (and often are) shoved aside by the OMB/LPAT.) In fact, even if an application is not actually appealed, the City planners are often under pressure to accept less than ideal plans in case OMB/LPAT imposes something even worse.
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
31,842
Reaction score
25,351
City:
Toronto
Though I absolutely agree that this building (or complex) is a great disappointment, it is not fair to blame the City (or in this case the Waterfront) Design Review Panel for what is there. Under the Planning Act, the City can (at least in theory) deal with issues of height and density but cannot deal with aesthetics or cheapness. (I say 'in theory" because, as we know all too well, even the City's best efforts in areas it is, supposedly, in charge of can be (and often are) shoved aside by the OMB/LPAT.) In fact, even if an application is not actually appealed, the City planners are often under pressure to accept less than ideal plans in case OMB/LPAT imposes something even worse.

And this project is on private land, which allows for even less leverage (not that WT is all that great at ensuring architectural excellence in their own development projects - ex. Waterfront Innovation Centre, Corus Quay, etc - but they are just disappointments, not eyesores).

In any case, aren't some calling for the project to be finished before rendering judgement? As it turns out, it wasn't necessary - it is clear from early on it's going to be an aesthetically wanting project.

AoD
 

kotsy

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 31, 2012
Messages
2,599
Reaction score
7,797
That's not a mindset I'll ever get behind. So people in Scarborough are less deserving of quality buildings that people in Downtown Toronto?


I don't think it's not a knock on who lives there. It's a knock on what buildings there typically turn out like.
 

win3280

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 10, 2019
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
Though I absolutely agree that this building (or complex) is a great disappointment, it is not fair to blame the City (or in this case the Waterfront) Design Review Panel for what is there. Under the Planning Act, the City can (at least in theory) deal with issues of height and density but cannot deal with aesthetics or cheapness. (I say 'in theory" because, as we know all too well, even the City's best efforts in areas it is, supposedly, in charge of can be (and often are) shoved aside by the OMB/LPAT.) In fact, even if an application is not actually appealed, the City planners are often under pressure to accept less than ideal plans in case OMB/LPAT imposes something even worse.
Understandable, but they need to take considerably to put the consumer best interest in the first place. We are the purchaser money out of our pocket.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
15,295
Reaction score
15,603
City:
Toronto
Understandable, but they need to take considerably to put the consumer best interest in the first place. We are the purchaser money out of our pocket.
If you own part of a less than perfect building your investment will not do well. Sometimes you need to pay a bit more to ensure a really good return. Sadly, this developer cheapened out and it is the owners who will pay,
 

condovo

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 2, 2007
Messages
3,619
Reaction score
6,242
^^ I think the problem is that if you own part of a less than perfect building your investment will STILL do well. In this city, you DON'T need to pay a bit more to ensure a really good return. This developer cheapened out and the investor-owners WON'T pay and probably don't care. The end users may be unhappy but not the investors.
 

DSC

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2008
Messages
15,295
Reaction score
15,603
City:
Toronto
Is the 'crown' finished? It seems to have a different 'treatment' on different sides - sort of as though they were using up old supplies of siding! :->
 

Top