denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Looks like a standard movie downtown. We need unified planning.
Hopefully this station looks nice and can handle crowds.
- Thread starter taal
- Start date
Hopefully this station looks nice and can handle crowds.
abovegrade
Active Member
Aren't Adamson the architects though? Which, if you look at their portfolio, is basically just the same trash.
Bjays92
Senior Member
Even if this is the case, this development is literally Toronto's Hudson Yards. That means watered down like everything else in Toronto, and we all know how Hudson yards turned out to begin with.
abovegrade
Active Member
woof, I know. Even Canary wharf - which was also a CF development, everyone in London finds it soulless and not worth passing through - even with “events” there :/
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Canary Wharf was Olympia & York, not CF. Also a Toronto company, but not CF.
It’s also evolved a lot over the years, Canary Wharf today is quite different than what it was originally built as in the 1980’s.
It’s also evolved a lot over the years, Canary Wharf today is quite different than what it was originally built as in the 1980’s.
abovegrade
Active Member
oops, thanks for the correction.
nstuch
Active Member
not to mention the street level public realm which is absolutely embarrassing, I was out and about in the downtown core for the first time in a couple of years recently and Adelaide, Richmond, King, John, Peter, Bremner, Wellington etc. all look like absolute trash. This for a city that thinks it belongs in the big leagues with London, Singapore etc.
urbanexplorer
Active Member
In the wise words of @smably , reminder that we have a Shabby Public Realm thread for this endlessly rehashed topic.
Personally, I think calling those streets in their entirety absolute trash is a bit hyperbolic but again, there' s a thread above to discuss more.
Adjei
Senior Member
I agree, like absolute trash and no one seems bothered from politicians to residents. You can come back in 100 years and you will find it looking the same.
torontologist
Active Member
I respectfully disagree.... I think our problem is the exact opposite; no one thinks we belong in the big leagues. Most Torontonians I know talk about "how boring it is compared to New York" or "how uncultured it is compared to Montreal" etc etc, and it's this attitude that leads us citizens/voters/municipal politicians to not give a hoot about the public realm and other things that a city has to take pride and invest in. All we care about here is low taxes. You know what, Toronto is already pretty great, it can be greater, and you're going to have to pay higher property taxes to make it happen. To quote Fran Lebowitz, I'm asking us all.... "to pretend it's a city". Let's take ourselves seriously.
Anyway, back on topic: It's a shame that East Harbour wasn't divided into smaller plots and sold to different developers, because when a project this large is realized all at once by a single party, you get results like Hudson Yards or Canary Wharf (The Well is a happy exception). I don't think it's the end of the world- the mixed uses imposed by the MZO will provide both animation and variation in architectural expression (compared to the office/commercial builds). The table top effect in the approved massing isn't great, but maybe a decade or so into construction, one of the commercial sites will get a proposal that seeks extra height for architectural expression like what was done for Mirvish-Gehry. It's too early to condemn the plans, there's a lot of room for success here.
isaidso
Senior Member
Toronto absolutely is a world class city but it's also true that a ton of locals are blind to the city's shortcomings. They're so used to bland architecture, shabby buildings, and dreary streets that they think that's as good as it gets. When you dare point it out they accuse you of being a Toronto basher. Or they think a place can't be vibrant and good looking at the same time. Have they not been to Amsterdam, London, Melbourne? They couldn't possibly have.
Toronto's roots are industrial blue collar and the dominant culture of Torontonians reflects that. Up until very recently almost everything was bare bones functional with little or no consideration whatsoever given to aesthetics. It speaks volumes that locals think streets like Queen West, College, and Yonge look good. Narrow concrete sidewalks? A jumbled mess of overhead electrical, plastic garbage bins, wooden logs used as lamp poles? One can go on and on and on.
Spending on architecture, good design, or luxury was considered frivolous, a waste of money, and to be roundly mocked. The new subway stations on the Yonge Line is a prime example of the backlash that bubbles up any time the City makes an effort to build something a cut above. With Toronto's rising affluence and stature, criticism of this blue collar mentality has been steadily growing. We're finally seeing more refinement, emphasis on design, and sophistication. Berczy Park? Streets are being dug up and quality paving put in. Electrical is being buried. Landscape architects are being hired. Waterfront Promenade? Aqualuna? The evidence for this sea change in the culture is everywhere.
We're definitley heading in the right direction but people have blinders on if they think the City is where it needs to be. Toronto is being upgraded, restored, and rebuilt block by block but it's not just the buildings that need fixing. We've only gotten to 5-10 streets (Bloor Street Improvement Project, one block of Dundas directly west of Yonge, and a few more) out of 1000s, thus far. We'll get where we need to go but pretending things are fine isn't very helpful.
Toronto's roots are industrial blue collar and the dominant culture of Torontonians reflects that. Up until very recently almost everything was bare bones functional with little or no consideration whatsoever given to aesthetics. It speaks volumes that locals think streets like Queen West, College, and Yonge look good. Narrow concrete sidewalks? A jumbled mess of overhead electrical, plastic garbage bins, wooden logs used as lamp poles? One can go on and on and on.
Spending on architecture, good design, or luxury was considered frivolous, a waste of money, and to be roundly mocked. The new subway stations on the Yonge Line is a prime example of the backlash that bubbles up any time the City makes an effort to build something a cut above. With Toronto's rising affluence and stature, criticism of this blue collar mentality has been steadily growing. We're finally seeing more refinement, emphasis on design, and sophistication. Berczy Park? Streets are being dug up and quality paving put in. Electrical is being buried. Landscape architects are being hired. Waterfront Promenade? Aqualuna? The evidence for this sea change in the culture is everywhere.
We're definitley heading in the right direction but people have blinders on if they think the City is where it needs to be. Toronto is being upgraded, restored, and rebuilt block by block but it's not just the buildings that need fixing. We've only gotten to 5-10 streets (Bloor Street Improvement Project, one block of Dundas directly west of Yonge, and a few more) out of 1000s, thus far. We'll get where we need to go but pretending things are fine isn't very helpful.
syn
Senior Member
I don't disagree with much of this, however if Toronto had managed to retain much of its heritage instead of razing it I think we'd find the city much more attractive.
This is why integrating the Unilever plant is a must, IMO.
Northern Light
Superstar
The Broadview and Eastern Flood Protection Landform is on the agenda for this week's FARM Ctte meeting at Waterfrontoronto.
See p. 112
From the above:
See p. 112
From the above:
cd concept
Senior Member
Will East Harbour towers be divided into different blogs according to phases? Because this one has its storeys at 65 instead of 49 just a thought!
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
There's a new Change-dot-org petition being circulated by Architectural Conservancy Ontario (Toronto Branch) to retain the old Lever Soap-Plant building.
Like the "Save the Foundry" folks on the other side of the Don, I do NOT support this argument when the previous use was one that created a lot of environmental contamination.
An area like "The Distillery" can't be compared to what you will find at a Foundry or a Chemical Plant like the Lever building, the contamination is far worse from those previous uses. It is fine to tear it down old industrial buildings and cart away the soil underneath for a new neighbourhood.
Like the "Save the Foundry" folks on the other side of the Don, I do NOT support this argument when the previous use was one that created a lot of environmental contamination.
An area like "The Distillery" can't be compared to what you will find at a Foundry or a Chemical Plant like the Lever building, the contamination is far worse from those previous uses. It is fine to tear it down old industrial buildings and cart away the soil underneath for a new neighbourhood.
