^ Coincidentally I've been thinking that the architects ought to restort to the use of brick in this development too. The area is bound to become monotonous with all-glass towers in the area, and brick would be a nice counterpoint. I am sure that the architects have hashed that one over, too, given that they've used this approach in the past, maybe the developer is looking for economies. But really, the latest iteration of 501 is just bad and gives nothing to the locale. I hope for better here.

And aA can do much better on the tower(s). Really. Look at Yonge/Rich. At least they have given us some variety there.
 
Rather than Brick or glass, what would be nice is something like that they did at Campus Common on Gerrard East. That, in my mind, would be a good way to have an interesting podium, on top of which could sit the rest of the structure. An example is below of the architecture there.

Glass, as mentioned correctly by another earlier, isn't charming and there is a lot of it around. Wood doesn't make sense because it deteriorates really quickly. Brick can be very monolithic and I'd be more interested in having some nice marble than brick, though this does add to cost, so what's left? I would posit the above.
 
Last edited:
Huh? Please tell me you're joking.

Also I hope you are aware that outside of brick, glass, and wood (wood cannot legally be used as an exterior material above a certain height anyway, by the way) there are many, many other materials that can be used, many of which are 100x better than the crap you posted as an example. I've had nothing but distaste for that building since it went up and it astounds me that an "architect" is responsible for that. In terms of the longevity and aesthetics of its materials, it's bad news.

Whoever designed it has a lot of gall to given that a well-respected architecture school is across the intersection from it and a beautiful heritage building beside it.
 
I actually wasn't joking. I find it quite attractive but I guess beauty is in the eye of the beholder. It is quite funky and a nice change from the monotony of Kerr Hall across the street.
 
Nothing inherently wrong with the massing of Campus Commons but the building envelope is just horrifying - if you want stucco/EIFS, don't bother with Campus Commons, Yonge is already replete with that - and they sure kept well.

re: architect - It's Joe Lokbo, which has since merged w DTAH.

AoD
 
At first glance, the submission to the DRP is nothing new from what they presented at the final community meeting in November. Shorter north tower, fat and tall south tower that is too close to the north tower, too close to the lane way, right up against Alexander without any setbacks and which is not in line with the height limits for this stretch of Yonge in the tall building guidelines. It appears that the developer has now decided to ignore all of the recent feedback and just go ahead anyway.

I worry that with the 11 Wellesley issue, the developer will get whatever they want on 501 in return for a parkette at 11.

This stretch of Yonge needs to be redeveloped. It's too bad we're going to get stuck with an inappropriate development for the lot.
 
Important or remember that tall building guidelines are just that, guidelines. There have been very, very few projects in the last few years that followed them.
 
Her stance on Massey, plus rebuttal from MikeinTO, who is closely associated with the industry, has already put your claims that KWT is anti-development to rest. It gets old.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Plus it was the definition of trolling, on top of the constant nonsense.

I don't see this development as being unique in any way, 2 boxes, one squat, and the other taller but equally forgettable. I wouldn't mind seeing that fantasy rendering done for the 11 Wellesley location put here instead, if that was able to achieve highest and best use, while being built over the subway.
 
Last edited:
The rendering looks amazing! I'm a huge fan of the tall podium on the right. Very well done!

I live right behind this! Should be interesting to see it go up!
 
devjohnson said:
The rendering looks amazing! I'm a huge fan of the tall podium on the right. Very well done!

I live right behind this! Should be interesting to see it go up!
Click to expand...

Probably not worth responding, but I've lived in the area, too, and I think this redesign is the worst effort that the architect and the developer have put forward for this site, to date.

The city should send all parties back for a total rethink. There are many ideas floating around that could turn this into a delightful project.

Lanterra is the problem here, I suspect. The mindset needs a good shakeup, they've got to get out of the rut they're in.

This proposal just isn't good enough.

EDIT: On a more positive note, there are good designs under consideration in Toronto, like below link. I think we can afford to push for quality at Yonge/Alexander, this is an important corner. Not saying that the below design is the answer, but it shows that someone is working at carrying internationalism forward rather than repeat, repeat, repeat.

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/05/sneak-peek-possible-design-cityzenclarion-hotel-sherbourne-bloor
 
Last edited:
Geez, AA is really struggling with this one. They can't seem to get any traction in their design efforts. This last one is just a mash-up of various styles and textures - nothing coherent or pleasing about it at all - It's like they're are frustrated and saying "okay then what about this?" Maybe they have been working on it for too long. Perhaps it's time to give another architectural firm a crack at it.


B8EFA1F7-B31E-476A-B811-850F40D53FD9-801-0000008ECF948E16.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top