[interchange42]

Tv: Glad to see you putting the video together and posting it here—anyone who feels passionately an issue is more likely to get some action when putting some work into the cause… but much of what you say here and in the video is largely a rehash of what was already said in posts 939 through 943, without aggregating the feedback.

Pam McConnell's office had nothing to do with what colour bricks were chosen for the buildings. The West Don Lands is in her ward, and she would certainly be invited to attend discussions on it, but she's not a decision-maker here. Waterfront Toronto was set up by three levels of government as a separate quasi-government body, so it's not within Councillor McC's jurisdiction. WT has its own parallel public consultation system and oversight.

Waterfront Toronto possibly could have had more to say about the colour, but I think there's a bit of a problem there. Bruce Kuwabara heads WT's Design Review Panel, but would have recused himself when buildings of his own design were at the WT DRP for consideration (Canary District and Canary Park are his). Did that make for an easier ride through the WT DRP for the KPMB work? For the whole neighbourhood? Was colour a consideration overall? The George Brown residence was likely half orange at the time it went through the WT DRP. Would the colour change have gone to the DRP when George Brown changed its marketing scheme? Not likely.

Meanwhile, there are members of UrbanToronto and obviously some architects who do not share your feelings about the overall gray cast. Instead of ranting and demanding 'how could this have happened?', why not just acknowledge that there are people who like the look of what has happened, and register your complaint as an opposing opinion. Pretending that your POV is the only reasonable one won't engage those who think differently particularly well.

Finally, as I already stated in post #942, DundeeKilmer is aware that, by in large, people are concerned with the extent of the gray here, and they are taking that into consideration with the next phases. What's been built here so far does not represent even half of what will eventually be built in the West Don Lands, so there's still time for you and others to be heard… so don't leave the developers off your list. I'm not sure why you haven't bothered to contact them; ultimately it's DundeeKilmer's project.

42

 

[TheKingEast]

In Sequins: On hold for the moment. Once DundeeKilmer are ready to move ahead with the next condo, we will see what has become of it. It may be the same plan or similar… it may not. I've been told it will have to do with the state of the market at the time. The Ten Arquitectos plan will cost more, so the developers will have to be convinced they'll be able to get a premium for the suites.

Tv: Glad to see you putting the video together and posting it here—anyone who feels passionately an issue is more likely to get some action when putting some work into the cause… but much of what you say here and in the video is largely a rehash of what was already said in posts 939 through 943, without aggregating the feedback.

Pam McConnell's office had nothing to do with what colour bricks were chosen for the buildings. The West Don Lands is in her ward, and she would certainly be invited to attend discussions on it, but she's not a decision-maker here. Waterfront Toronto was set up by three levels of government as a separate quasi-government body, so it's not within Councillor McC's jurisdiction. WT has its own parallel public consultation system and oversight.

Waterfront Toronto possibly could have had more to say about the colour, but I think there's a bit of a problem there. Bruce Kuwabara heads WT's Design Review Panel, but would have recused himself when buildings of his own design were at the WT DRP for consideration (Canary District and Canary Park are his). Did that make for an easier ride through the WT DRP for the KPMB work? For the whole neighbourhood? Was colour a consideration overall? The George Brown residence was likely half orange at the time it went through the WT DRP. Would the colour change have gone to the DRP when George Brown changed its marketing scheme? Not likely.

Meanwhile, there are members of UrbanToronto and obviously some architects who do not share your feelings about the overall gray cast. Instead of ranting and demanding 'how could this have happened?', why not just acknowledge that there are people who like the look of what has happened, and register your complaint as an opposing opinion. Pretending that your POV is the only reasonable one won't engage those who think differently particularly well.

Finally, as I already stated in post #942, DundeeKilmer is aware that, by in large, people are concerned with the extent of the gray here, and they are taking that into consideration with the next phases. What's been built here so far does not represent even half of what will eventually be built in the West Don Lands, so there's still time for you and others to be heard… so don't leave the developers off your list. I'm not sure why you haven't bothered to contact them; ultimately it's DundeeKilmer's project.

42

I'd say most do not like the grey. There is nothing vibrant about this project. If anyone deserves blame here it's the developers more than anyone else. Dundee did a great job with the buildings in the Distillery....but flopped with their latest offerings here.

 

[DSC]

What's going to built at the southwest corner of Front St E? Wasn't there a proposal by a well renowned international architect that was canned?

Yes, I think you probably mean THIS: http://nationtalk.ca/story/supporting-urban-aboriginal-health-culture-and-economic-growth/

 

[Tewder]

I'd say most do not like the grey. There is nothing vibrant about this project. If anyone deserves blame here it's the developers more than anyone else. Dundee did a great job with the buildings in the Distillery....but flopped with their latest offerings here.

With respect to materials/colour your point's pretty subjective, no? Whether you like grey or not the unity of colour helps to define this area, which isn't a bad thing. Once it matures and becomes more 'lived in' any perceived overwhelming impression of greyness will mellow but the underlying aesthetic unity will remain.

As for grey itself? It's a neutral, like brown or black or most other colours used for building materials. I wouldn't want our entire low rise city to look like this but we aren't in any danger. This area will stand apart from other areas because it was purpose-built and designed cohesively, using a palette of materials that is distinct. I really don't see the issue.

 

[UrbanFervour]

I think you can have unity in the gray brick but you need to have color to offset it- they've tried here and there with certain details in this development but it doesn't make a strong enough impact. The problem is that it just looks like yet another toronto development that "plays it safe" rather than adding something architecturally interesting or innovative to the city.

 

[CapitalSeven]

I have looked for and failed to find it, but someone from Waterfront Toronto or the games organization said somewhere that some of the buildings were supposed to be more colorful, but were changed because of the connotations or symbolism of the colours. I don't recall any details or examples.

 

[Torontovibe]

I have looked for and failed to find it, but someone from Waterfront Toronto or the games organization said somewhere that some of the buildings were supposed to be more colorful, but were changed because of the connotations or symbolism of the colours. I don't recall any details or examples.

Yes but I think that only applies to the George Brown Collage building which was supposed to be orange. (and I think white)

 

[MisterF]

I understand not everyone likes grey. I happen to like grey brick. It's better than yellow for the most part. What I don't get is why are people so concern over one "grey district" with dozens of red brick districts and hundreds more subdivisions of various shades of ugly reds. Hopefully future non Pan Am buildings conform to the grey brick motif. The grey offsets all the red of the distillery.

You're really wondering why people tend to prefer colour over grey? Come on. Our eyes evolved to detect colour for a reason. And not surprisingly, almost nobody's favourite colour is grey.

 

[Tuscani01]

You're really wondering why people tend to prefer colour over grey? Come on. Our eyes evolved to detect colour for a reason. And not surprisingly, almost nobody's favourite colour is grey.

Those stats also show that not many people hate grey though...

They also show blue as being the most liked, and least disliked colour, along with green being high up there, yet way more people have complained about blue/green glass in this city than I've seen complaining about grey.

 

[MisterF]

Those stats also show that not many people hate grey though...

They also show blue as being the most liked, and least disliked colour, along with green being high up there, yet way more people have complained about blue/green glass in this city than I've seen complaining about grey.

Well it's the first google result I found and it has nothing to do with architecture specifically so take it with a grain of salt. But it's easy to see why grey, a colour that's nobody's favourite or least favourite, would be thought of as dull by most people when it dominates every aspect of an entire neighbourhood. As for green and blue, they're the colour of vegetation, water, and clear sky so it's easy to see why they're so popular. But that doesn't necessarily mean that those colours translate well to buildings.

I think people tend to prefer warmer colours and textures when it comes to architecture. Nobody complains about our older, mostly red brick neighbourhoods. Or the vibrant colours of east coast towns. Or the red roofs in central Europe. People do complain about newer buildings that are dominated by cold colours and a lack of texture ("clean lines"). And the famously grey Soviet cityscapes are mocked pretty much universally.

 

[Torontovibe]

Did you ever stop to consider that it wasn't just the colour grey people were complaining about but the ubiquitous use of it in Toronto. (mostly spandrel) If grey was used moderately, it wouldn't be a problem. When every building in a whole district is grey, then it becomes a problem. The same thing applies to blue glass. If Southcore only had a few buildings with blue glass but also mixed in a few different colours and textures, I bet few people would complain. It's when an area is dominated by grey spandrel or blue glass, that people get sick of it. The over use of cold materials like spandrel and glass, everywhere in the city, is becoming an issue. People want more diversity in colour, texture and design. I think that's a pretty reasonable expectation, yet developers don't seem to get it in Toronto.

Like I have said before, with this unprecedented development cycle, I think we are missing a huge (possibly one in a lifetime) opportunity to build a city with great architecture and one that has its own distinctive look and character. Few people seem to care about leaving any kind of legacy in this city, which is why I appreciate people like Mirvish. You don't build great cities with conventional glass boxes and grey spandrel! (which most big cities already have)

 

[urbandreamer]

You've got to keep in mind the architects were following orders from the developers, who likely are a conservative bunch who get their design inspiration from trips to Europe. So if this project was under conceptual design 5 years ago, their inspiration was from early 2000s Euro designs--many featured chic charcoal brick and minimal glass designs. They're still using it. And it can look fantastic! I imagine budget limitations impacted the design here.

Re: leaving a legacy in this city. You don't need to hire Gehry. Here's what real world class architecture looks like: http://www.ksark.se/?lang=en

 

[TheKingEast]

It's not even about the buildings being grey. It's about EVERY component of this area being grey. The bricks, the lights, the spandrel, the roads, the stop lights, the sewers. Everything is light and dark grey. Talk about depressing. But maybe I'm expecting too much from a boring city.

 

[FMCS]

So disappointing! I don't mind the buildings but everything else should be more cheerful, roads and sidewalks the light poles, fences and benches.

 

[Tewder]

...When every building in a whole district is grey, then it becomes a problem....

Like I have said before, with this unprecedented development cycle, I think we are missing a huge (possibly one in a lifetime) opportunity to build a city with great architecture and one that has its own distinctive look and character...

T.V.,

Yet there was indeed an attempt to create a district with a distinctive look and character here, and partly through the cohesiveness of colour. As a purpose-built master-designed neighbourhood it does feel very different from other city neighbourhoods, those that evolved more organically (and which quite frankly don't look that much different from each other, as much as i like them). Uniformity of colour is but one aspect of this... and as stark as it feels now it will mellow over time as it becomes lived in, as trees and plantings mature, as other design elements are added which add the colour of life and consumerism, as with any other area in town. In 50 or 100 years from now, however, it will still feel like a very different neighbourhood, a very defined area that is unlike the rest of the city... and this is where it will be appreciated for its distinctive look and character.

So let's not worry about what was fashionable in 2006 or what will be fashionable in 2025, city building is far more long term than this. A city that evolves with a mix of old organic development and master-designed areas will always feel more layered and interesting from an urban point of view, i.e. a city such as Paris (which isn't afraid of a grey/drab palette either by the way):

http://blog.parisattitude.com/design-architecture/the-town-planning-according-to-haussmann.html