It would be nice if new developments in the area can continue to replicate the retail laneways and courtyards theme that gives Yorkville its charm and appeal. 38s is pretty overwhelming on this low-rise section of Yorkville. I'd prefer a well planned mid-rise similar to Context King West, which takes inspiration for its "Lanes" concept from Yorkville.
 
Travis said:
It would be nice if new developments in the area can continue to replicate the retail laneways and courtyards theme that gives Yorkville its charm and appeal. 38s is pretty overwhelming on this low-rise section of Yorkville. I'd prefer a well planned mid-rise similar to Context King West, which takes inspiration for its "Lanes" concept from Yorkville.
Click to expand...

Absolutely. This would definitely be the right approach in this area. Tall towers are too overpowering for what's left of Yorkville, in my opinion, and the charm that comes from the (all too few!) laneways through the area is going to be taken from us.
 
You guys do realize that the old Four Seasons building (definitely NOT a midrise) is across the street from this proposal? The height precedent for the area was set when that building was allowed. So; 1971?
 
That precedent is not carved in stone. The Tour Montparnasse in Paris did not lead to the raising of the low rise left bank.

I understand the need for density and there are definitely areas in the city where this makes a great deal of sense and should be encouraged... but I'm not sure it makes sense to further destroy the charm of a popular central area that works well as low rise.
 
i just dont know how much turning back we can do.. I love yorkville but we have let development creep in... with the development of the holtz site and the parking garage behind the holt site and with the new development on the current four season site, and 155 cumberland we have accepted new height in the area... im not saying fighting to preserve isnt worth it but this particular spot seems to be more a reactionary response then a logical response... if this was the firt site which had been proposed in the yorkville area it wouldnt have been a problem... but because its like number 10 ppl are super sensitive..
 
This doesn't mean certain parts of it can't be saved before it's too late. Why not just establish height and development restrictions to protect the heart of Yorkville, around Yorkville Park and along Cumberland and Yorkville Ave between Bloor and Bay, for example? This would also take in Old York Lane, Hazelton and Scollard, and the residential part of Yorkville that runs north of there. This then would clear the way for high rise along Bloor and Bay and points east of Bay to Yonge. Best of both worlds then!
 
Wow! I just love it when an architect takes bold and daring chances!

This is something else...whoda thunkit?... in T.O.?

Very exhilarating. Just sitback and observe the suble nuances and the striking angles.

Just can't wait for this one.




4-25-2012%201-51-07%20PM.jpg
 
vatche said:
I wouldn't mind if a building with the same look as the stern building on st Thomas goes up there. But only 5 storeys, not more. With cute boutiques and cafés below.
Click to expand...

Given what's there right now, why bother? (Esp. since tearing-down-of-modernism-on-behalf-of-traditionalism wouldn't exactly go down well with York Square's defenders)
 
sixrings said:
im not saying fighting to preserve isnt worth it but this particular spot seems to be more a reactionary response then a logical response... if this was the firt site which had been proposed in the yorkville area it wouldnt have been a problem... but because its like number 10 ppl are super sensitive..
Click to expand...

You're not aware of the merits of York Square, are you?

Though I can see how some might feel that way re the existing structures that were incorporated into York Square--which are, in themselves, "unimportant" except as context-defining spolia, the raw existing built materials that were knitted into a whole. (And anyone who thinks that the preferred preservationist solution is to liberate that stuff from the Vidal Sassoon-y brick and portholes is truly Wrong-Way Corrigan re the issue at hand.)
 
Big Daddy said:
Wow! I just love it when an architect takes bold and daring chances!

This is something else...whoda thunkit?... in T.O.?

Very exhilarating. Just sitback and observe the suble nuances and the striking angles.

Just can't wait for this one.




4-25-2012%201-51-07%20PM.jpg
Click to expand...

Brilliant & entertaining.

Have some faith in the process guys. This one ain't done yet.
 
I agree - more of the same old/same old/. I don't see how this will enhance Yorkville.
 
It will detract from Yorkville and Toronto, removing noteworthy architectural and urbanist achievements, heritage, and a part of the pleasant low-rise form of the area. It's a step backwards because this kind of crude high-rise development is what architects like Barton Myers and Jack Diamond were confronting in the first place with projects like York Square. It may compromise the Queen's Park view corridor. This project may be second only to the horrendous Times Square North as the worst development proposal in the city. The 58-storey tower overpowering the First Parliament Site would be number one, except there's some indication that it might be averted for a 5-storey data centre.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top