Besides, when it comes to sunnyray's "artistic roof design" invocations and the like: around these parts, "artistic" can all too often = "cheesy". Case in point: NY Towers.

To me, there's more genuine "artistry" in an sleekly spartan flattopped 80s/90s office building like P&G than there is in a skylined cheesefest like NY Towers...
 
Besides, when it comes to sunnyray's "artistic roof design" invocations and the like: around these parts, "artistic" can all too often = "cheesy". Case in point: NY Towers.

To me, there's more genuine "artistry" in an sleekly spartan flattopped 80s/90s office building like P&G than there is in a skylined cheesefest like NY Towers...

Each NY towers would look ridiculous alone,... but with 4 of them together,... well, they look less ridiculous. What's ridiculous about these NY towers, is that they're about 125-130m each and about a third of the height is taken up by the NY style roof design.

Before amalgamation, in other words,... before the 45-50 residential condo towers were dumped onto the North York downtown skyline,... downtown North York's skyline was graced by a number of interesting office buildings,... most with sloping and triangular artistic roofs,... like Nestle building, Royal Bank building at Yonge & Hollywood, Madison Building, Xerox Building and North America Life Insurance building at Yonge & Finch,... and the old city hall type watchtower at North York city centre. Separately, these office buildings would have looked odd,... but together with their interesting roofs, they gave the North York downtown area an unified interesting look. But since amalgamation, there's been 45-50 new residential condo towers, mostly with plan flat roofs, erasing the sloping triangular roof identity that once dominated the North York downtown skyline.


He argues, cause Sunnyray most likley lives in a pad that eventuly will have some obstructed views, if one or both of these two developments go ahead and get built.

Your logic is flawed,...

Am I arguing that Tridel Hullmark Centre should NOT be built? Am I arguing that Bazis Emerald Park should NOT be built? I'm against both these buildings at their current proposed height.

I've consistently stated both Bazis Emerald Park and Tridel Hullmark Centre should be scaled down to the 100m height limit,... but if they have an artistic designed roof then that part of the roof can exceed the 100m limit,... as Empress Walk's two residential towers are about 116m because they have artistic designed "pinnacles" on their roof top. And that seems to be the rule with regards to 100m height limit in the downtown North York area, none of the residential nor office part of the building exceed 100m height limit but if there is artistic merit with the roof design then that roof part only may exceed the 100m limit.

Thus at the end of the day, Bazis Emerald Park and Tridel Hullmark Centre could be built at 110-115m,... since they both have artistic designed roofs. Currently the tallest residential condo anywhere near Bazis Emerald Park and Tridel Hullmark Centre is Minto Garden Radiance at 98m directly east of Tridel Hullmark Centre,... so even if I lived in the top floor penthouse of Minto Garden Radiance, my view would still be obstructed by the shortened 110m-115m Bazis Emerald Park and Tridel Hullmark Centre.

Currenty, the tallest building the Yonge Sheppard area is the Nestle building at 118m with an artistic designed roof,... a 21 storey office building with 0% residential. The only way a 110m-115m Bazis Emerald Park and Tridel Hullmark Centre would not obstruct the view from the Nestle building, would be if I lived on the roof of the 118m Nestle building,... yes, I'm busted,... I'm really a Peregrine Falcon,... a Paragrine Falcon with a computer and internet access. :)
 
So instead of having buildings at various heights, interacting and conversing with one another as well as the street below, you want a uniform set of 100m-ish buildings with a series of funny hats? Interesting.

Also, you have yet to address my commentary about the wall-like effects of buildings with uniform dimensions.
 
Wnat's the matter with a bunch of flat roofs?

2559707358_5734d0793b.jpg
 
So instead of having buildings at various heights, interacting and conversing with one another as well as the street below, you want a uniform set of 100m-ish buildings with a series of funny hats? Interesting.

Also, you have yet to address my commentary about the wall-like effects of buildings with uniform dimensions.


I have never heard of anyone complain that North York downtown area with its 100m height limit is like a wall.

But there is the common complaint that the condos (some as high as 150-160m) along the harbourfront act as a wall,... a huge wall restricting the view of Lake Ontario for the rest of the city. The condos along the harbourfront along with the raised Gardiner Expressway act as a giant barrier restricting our access to Lake Ontario. The harbourfront condos are NOT subject to a 100m height limit, or any other height limit.

Hmmmm,... maybe the harbourfront area should have had a height limit. What if the harbourfront area had a height limit of 60m from the shoreline to the Gardiner Expressway,... then from the Gardiner Expressway to Wellington there was a 100m height limit,... then between Wellington to King Street, there were a 150m height limit,... north of King Street there's no height limit. This progression of height limit would allow a better view of the lake for more people,.... instead of staring at a wall of harbourfront condos.

One of the key aspect that makes downtown North York so attractive is that its a very walkable area,... urbanly-self-sufficient (in that the local residents don't have to frequently go outside the area for basic amenities,... unlike harbourfront and groceries),... in downtown North York, there's lots of restaurants, movie theatres, stores, pubs, coffee shops, little malls, banks, grocery stores, subway stations, etc,... along this stretch of Yonge Street,... North York downtown is an area where you always find people walking around,... to go to work, subway, home, local establishments or just to hang out,... it's a walk-able urban area, just like downtown Toronto,... but cleaner! When you go to Scarborough City Centre or even Mississauga City Centre,... you don't see people walking around outside on the sidewalks, when people need to cross Hurontario Street or McCowan,... they're more likely to get in their cars and drive! What's the use of having an urban area, if it's car friendly and not people friendly?

In downtown North York, I walk past the 15 storey Proctor & Gamble building (60-70m high) quite often when I go to the subway station,.... and on a windy day, the wind gust that blows around that little building just takes your breath away,... you'll struggle just to keep your balance. Right now there's a 100m height limit on buildings in downtown North York,... but imagine if they start building towers that are 142m like Bazis Emerald Park or 164m like Tridel Hullmark Centre,.... the higher you go, the stronger the wind,... and these buildings will be directing more wind downward onto the street level. Look at the design of Bazis Emerald Park,... the top of the towers curves and lean westward,... those strong westerly winds will hit the Bazis Emerald Park towers and be deflected downwards onto street level,... blowing people and garbage all around.

The higher you build the buildings,... the less walkable and less pedestrian friendly this part of town will become.

Since we're on the subject of building design and overal building-scape of an area,... do you think Bazis Emerald Park was designed specifically for the North York downtown area? It looks more like the architect-designer Roy Varacalli just reused a building design originally designed for Emerald Tower in Astana, Kazakhstan,... and then just customize a podium to fit the plot of land in North York,... and voila,... Bazis Emerald Park.
 
Wow. Where to begin?

I have never heard of anyone complain that North York downtown area with its 100m height limit is like a wall.

But there is the common complaint that the condos (some as high as 150-160m) along the harbourfront act as a wall,... a huge wall restricting the view of Lake Ontario for the rest of the city. The condos along the harbourfront along with the raised Gardiner Expressway act as a giant barrier restricting our access to Lake Ontario. The harbourfront condos are NOT subject to a 100m height limit, or any other height limit.

There is only one condo over 150m south of the Gardiner, and it hasn't even finished construction, let alone had time to become the the 'menace' you describe (there are no condos around 160m in this area unless you count MLS and the proposed ICE, both north of the Gardiner).

Hmmmm,... maybe the harbourfront area should have had a height limit. What if the harbourfront area had a height limit of 60m from the shoreline to the Gardiner Expressway,... then from the Gardiner Expressway to Wellington there was a 100m height limit,... then between Wellington to King Street, there were a 150m height limit,... north of King Street there's no height limit. This progression of height limit would allow a better view of the lake for more people,.... instead of staring at a wall of harbourfront condos.

I'm not sure how musing about the 'lost opportunities' of our harbourfront strengthens your position concerning North York.

One of the key aspect that makes downtown North York so attractive is that its a very walkable area,... urbanly-self-sufficient (in that the local residents don't have to frequently go outside the area for basic amenities,...

That's really good to hear. It's not often that you get vibrant downtown cores, let alone vibrant satellite downtown cores (I'm not being sarcastic, this really is good).

unlike harbourfront and groceries),...

Is this a new neighborhood I haven't yet heard about?

in downtown North York, there's lots of restaurants, movie theatres, stores, pubs, coffee shops, little malls, banks, grocery stores, subway stations, etc,... along this stretch of Yonge Street,... North York downtown is an area where you always find people walking around,... to go to work, subway, home, local establishments or just to hang out,... it's a walk-able urban area, just like downtown Toronto,... but cleaner! When you go to Scarborough City Centre or even Mississauga City Centre,... you don't see people walking around outside on the sidewalks, when people need to cross Hurontario Street or McCowan,... they're more likely to get in their cars and drive! What's the use of having an urban area, if it's car friendly and not people friendly?

Let's not get carried away. It's not like Yonge becomes some sort of mews up there. Also, you have already argued that North York is pedestrian. Let's hear about some of its other qualities.

Right now there's a 100m height limit on buildings in downtown North York,... but imagine if they start building towers that are 142m like Bazis Emerald Park or 164m like Tridel Hullmark Centre,....

Is this not the debate we are having? We know about the height limit, it's why we're here.

the higher you go, the stronger the wind,... and these buildings will be directing more wind downward onto the street level. Look at the design of Bazis Emerald Park,... the top of the towers curves and lean westward,... those strong westerly winds will hit the Bazis Emerald Park towers and be deflected downwards onto street level,... blowing people and garbage all around.

Though you are correct in stating that the higher you go, the stronger the wind, how can you prove that this equally affects people at street level? I am not disagreeing that these towers will contribute to the 'wind tunnel' effect, but not to the degree which you suggest. Also, can you prove that the 'hats' on the Bazis' project will have that great an effect at street level? Just think, the further they are off the ground, the further they are away from you. ;)

The higher you build the buildings,... the less walkable and less pedestrian friendly this part of town will become.

Absolute, 100%, total bs. There is no way to prove a correlation between building heights and neighborhood walkability. Some of the best neighborhoods are found in areas populated with towers while some of the worst lie in single-plot slums.

Since we're on the subject of building design and overal building-scape of an area,... do you think Bazis Emerald Park was designed specifically for the North York downtown area? It looks more like the architect-designer Roy Varacalli just reused a building design originally designed for Emerald Tower in Astana, Kazakhstan,... and then just customize a podium to fit the plot of land in North York,... and voila,... Bazis Emerald Park.

Normally, I'd agree with you, however, knowing your avowed preference for ironic hats, I'll just let this one slip.
 
Okay, can we move on from the cut and paste posts now ???

5 pages of the same old, same old.

I agree that the height and density limits have been GROSSLY exceeded, and should be somewhat respected. While I am sympathetic to your comments sunnyraytoronto, you're better off contacting your city councillor and the city planner than going on a repetitive tangent here.
 
Let it be known that wind tunnel effect can be avoided with the correct building and setbacks. So when the wind hits the building, it doesn't funnel downwards on to the street, it hits a podium and then is diverted sideways. It never gets to reach the road at all.
 
agreed khristopher ...

it is for this precise reason, it is a generally accepted 'urban design practice' nowadays to build towers atop a podium to mitigate towers' wind effect on pedestrians at street level (such that wind patterns are directed to the podium, rather than to the street as sunnyraytoronto suggests) :p
 
And when it comes to this painful amateur-night espousal of "artistic" tops (who on earth uses that kind of terminology?!?): yeah, sure, a cluster of New York Towers might "make more sense" than a standalone. But even so, that ensemble is a lot, lot, lot *less* "artistic" than a flat-topped (and arguably urbanistically windswept) ensemble like the TD Centre. (And the TD bank tower, too, was most awkward when it was alone in 1967 as a 2001 monolith hogging the skyline...)
 
I just called Emerald Park Presentation at 416-221-8821 and was informed that the Emerald Park project is a go. The person there said don't expect a project cancellation letter from the builder as this will not happen.
 
Last edited:
I just called Emerald Park Presentation at 416-221-8821 and was informed that the Emerald Park project is a go. The person there said don't expect a project cancellation letter from the builder as this will not happen.

how can Emerald Park be a go ... they don't even have zoning permission to build the density, residential vs. commercial, etc !?!?!
 
I just called Emerald Park Presentation at 416-221-8821 and was informed that the Emerald Park project is a go. The person there said don't expect a project cancellation letter from the builder as this will not happen.

wow, if that's true then good for them.
 
Hmm, interesting coincidence with the "1 Bloor East is a go" rumours... I wonder if someone finally handed Bazis a wad of cash.
 
Hmm, interesting coincidence with the "1 Bloor East is a go" rumours... I wonder if someone finally handed Bazis a wad of cash.

The issues that are faced by the developer go well beyond access to capital.
 

Back
Top