They want to drop a 29-storey tower (and the others) in the middle of a mature, low-rise neighbourhood. There are no buildings even remotely close to that size anywhere near this intersection. Such a sudden change in mass and scale is not good built form, no matter how exciting the ideas are.

I greatly enjoy walking about older low-rise neighourhoods, and not only those with obvious charm or 'character'. Having said that, this area has little charm or character outside of Markham street. A better description would be shabby/transient.

I'm not sure what you mean by a "mature neighbourhood" what is that quality specifically? And why is a collection of low and mid-rises not good built form in that context "no matter how exciting"? I'm not an urban planner, so it would be helpful if that were explained. I think transitions are interesting - no need to have undifferentiated low-rise from Spadina stretching to Etobicokle.
 
Last edited:
"shabby and transient" is a hilariously subjective judgement. Transient is a terribly wrong way to characterize the neighbourhood. Many of the businesses on the strip are historically and culturally important to the city and have been around for decades. Mature neighbourhoods are communities with defined histories.
 
I wonder what Jane Jacobs would have thought of this? I think she'd approve.
 
One of the things that has been getting some flak here but I really like are the varying facades. It echoes the existing retail along Bloor, which is made up of thin buildings with a variety of facades, each the front for a different business with either office or apartments above. The proposed buildings seem like the typical Bloor streetscape stretched up to the sky.

I think it looks jumbled or busy because in most renders we are mostly looking at this as a whole massive proposal from up high or far away. For pedestrians up close, I think this will make for a comfortable and human-scaled facade.
 
JasonParis said:
I doubt it too. She wasn't for block-busting, super-projects, etc. It was all about re-use for her. Old buildings, new purposes and all that.

Having said that, she was sometimes wrong too.

FTR, I approve of this development!
Click to expand...

I think it is important not to venerate her as an infallible figure - for one her idea of community activism applied to its' logical conclusion would probably lead to stasis.

AoD
 
nrb said:
"shabby and transient" is a hilariously subjective judgement. Transient is a terribly wrong way to characterize the neighbourhood. Many of the businesses on the strip are historically and culturally important to the city and have been around for decades. Mature neighbourhoods are communities with defined histories.
Click to expand...

You responded with your own subjective comment. Well, you didn't object to my 'shabby' description (because its objectively true) so I will take on the transient aspect. Aside from Honest Eds where are all these culturally and historically important businesses? And of them, which are being displaced?
 
The only shabby part of the hood is Bloor and some buildings on Bathurst. But the residential areas are gorgeous. I lived on Bathurst close to this site as a U of T student and I was transient, as were many of the students in the adjacent areas like Chinatown. But transience creates intrigue and freshness in contrast to bourgeois continuity - it isn't simply a negative in any way (and it isn't just students, many areas of downtown have out of town business people staying for a one or two year contract, do you call that negative transience?).

In any event, I love the project. However, the height has to be seen as a concern. What is at stake here - as with the 42s Madison proposal - is nothing short of the future of Bloor street downtown. With proposals like this, we will get a radically discontinuous built form, where 2s or 3s Bloor street structures abut 30s towers, which back onto 2s or 3s houses all around. And heritage is certainly at risk: demolition or facadectomy is assured by the increase in Bloor land values without city guidance.

Personally, I don't mind a variegated streetscape, but the disjuncture - which is a hallmark of GTA development - isn't my preferred urban form. That is an aesthetic judgement. I like european 6s-8s blocks with some variety. But some could find interest in the experience of total difference. And I sometimes do. To love Toronto you have to cultivate an appreciation for the contrast.

In the end I support density on transit lines, so we have to look at the evidence of how it affects the city. I for one haven't seen enough evidence that huge height differences negatively affect services or efficiency, but I am open to information. Also, the implication of a future Bloor being 20s on average. And that would be crucial to a final judgement about this project. It will certainly frame the future of the city.
 
Last edited:
agoraflaneur said:
The only shabby part of the hood is Bloor and some buildings on Bathurst. But the residential areas are gorgeous. I lived on Bathurst close to this site as a U of T student and I was transient, as were many of the students in the adjacent areas like Chinatown. But transience creates intrigue and freshness in contrast to bourgeois continuity - it isn't simply a negative in any way (and it isn't just students, many areas of downtown have out of town business people staying for a one or two year contract, do you call that negative transience?).

In any event, I love the project. However, the height has to be seen as a concern. What is at stake here - as with the 42s Madison proposal - is nothing short of the future of Bloor street downtown. With proposals like this, we will get a radically discontinuous built form, where 2s or 3s Bloor street structures abut 30s towers, which back onto 2s or 3s houses all around. And heritage is certainly at risk: demolition or facadectomy is assured by the increase in Bloor land values without city guidance.

Personally, I don't mind a variegated streetscape, but the disjuncture - which is a hallmark of GTA development - isn't my preferred urban form. That is an aesthetic judgement. I like european 6s-8s blocks with some variety. But some could find interest in the experience of total difference. And I sometimes do. To love Toronto you have to cultivate an appreciation for the contrast.

In the end I support density on transit lines, so we have to look at the evidence of how it affects the city. I for one haven't seen enough evidence that huge height differences negatively affect services or efficiency, but I am open to information. Also, the implication of a future Bloor being 20s on average. And that would be crucial to a final judgement about this project. It will certainly frame the future of the city.
Click to expand...

Great thoughts, I will re-read later this evening. As an aside, I often hear about fine european low-rise boulevards. They are invariably 18th or 19th century masterpieces built at great expense by imperial powers. Of course, they're great. That isn't what we have.
 
The real mystery is ...

The real mystery is why urbantoronto.ca isn't featuring this as a front page story? Smile.

Seriously the retail concept, as others have observed, is bold, necessary and innovative. I also think many radically underestimate how much density is required to support "high street" retail. Much of "Korea Town" is tired and showing signs of collapse. This project may well push the whole area into a full on revitalization.
 
salsa said:
For once, Christopher Hume is finally happy about something.

http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/201...onest-ed-site-a-deal-we-cant-refuse-hume.html
Click to expand...


I had no idea that Hume had such a chip in his shoulder about planning staff. From the article:


Planners must be pinching themselves; though they’ll find lots to complain about – they think that’s their job
Click to expand...

Indeed, this proposal goes well beyond typical city demands; it will be interesting to see how Toronto’s planning geniuses respond. Chances are a scheme so hyper-urban will reveal how essentially suburban they really are.
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top