I changed my mind--build the damn thing here! Boutique is literally a stone's throw away, and of course, look at those distillery district condos--in a photograph, they look out of place. But hanging out in the area you rarely notice them unless you like looking at the sky rather than the birds on the ground.:D
 
fouronesix said:
If this tower featured a podium built out to the property line, roughly equal in hieght or even up to five stories taller than its neighbours, then a step back to the tower portion, I beleive the transition in height between properties would be much more successfully accomplished. As it stands now, despite the differently articulated facades, the lack of a physical seperation between podium and tower in terms of massing would present a sheer surface rising 45 storeies into the air, providing a somewhat jarring transition in the streetwall. Building out to the property line, including a stepback and maybe shortening the tower by at most 10 stories would, I think, provide exactly the tall/short, new/old contrast you allude too.
Click to expand...

Yea but you would obliterate any view of the Royal Alex's east facing facade by building up to the property line. By setting the building back you respect the heritage building and you limit any potentially adverse built form impacts to the portion of the facade nearest Pearl Street - which is basically a blank wall anyways. This is actually one of those times where the as of right zoning would be much more damaging to the surrounding heritage buildings than what is proposed (which makes the staff report that much more idiotic).
 
Quick Sketchup/Google Earth renderings.

4412475182_d9d3e47eeb_o.jpg

View from AGO

4411707353_e058a77e08_o.jpg

King Street West

4412475410_ed41fc39b6_o.jpg

Queen/Soho parking lot

4412475534_21a37b18ec_o.jpg


4412475654_547abb8f74_o.jpg

Putting it in context with the Shangri-La.
 
Last edited:
Architecturefan said:
Yea but you would obliterate any view of the Royal Alex's east facing facade by building up to the property line. By setting the building back you respect the heritage building and you limit any potentially adverse built form impacts to the portion of the facade nearest Pearl Street - which is basically a blank wall anyways.
Click to expand...
I admire the idea of opening up the space and I like the thought of being able to see the Royal Alex's eastern side, but I also feel that the open space with a 45 storey building attached will only emphasize the height of the tower even more. I also wouldn't want to see a podium right up to property line. Why not have a podium that comes out say 5 meters or so from the tower? This would still leave some significant open space and also help reduce the impact of such a large tower within the pedestian context.

By the way Fouronsix, great posts! Welcome to the forum.
 
Personally I think this might get more mileage if they jettisoned the mini park in favour of a 4 storey podium that housed an off-off-broadway sized theatre. That way the tower would truly be a Pearl Street structure and the whole project would integrate better with the context on King.
 
I think we can probably agree that this tower, when seen in context with other tall buildings in the vicinity, will "fit in" - in the sense that if you stand in the middle of Metro Square and look around it won't be any taller than other neighbouring towers that are either built, under construction, or approved. And, walking along King Street - from either direction - it'll be one in a sequence of tall buildings that unfold, overlapping in the field of vision as you approach. The several renderings we've seen also indicate that it'll be part of a larger context of towers. The sticking point seems to be how we evaluate the visual impact ( the height ) of the tower from close up.

fouronesix joins me in admiration of how, in the Distillery, The Great Man has enhanced the horizontal heft of the existing heritage structures by means of a podium building at the base of the Pure Spirit condo, which the tower plays off of. Two additional Distillery towers will work in much the same way, with podiums and a low ribbon building planned for the south end of the site extending the low-rise realm and expanding the network of existing pedestrian laneways by defining narrow spaces at street level. And I think the situation along the north side of King, where Theatre Park is planned, is analogous. When I stand in Distillery Lane, as I did yesterday afternoon on my walkabout to spread joy among my people, and I look up at Pure Spirit the visual foreshortening reduces the tower in relation to the podium building that stretches away to both sides. In fact, the closer you get to any such a tower the less impact it has. Standing at the base of a tall building and looking directly up will reduce its visual weight in relation to its surroundings, and that will apply to Theatre Park.
 
So, are we to assume that if this goes to the OMB, that this project will likely be approved? Personally, I'm liking this building, judging from the renders so far.
 
The proposal would have been so much more palatable if it is at the north east corner of the block - relating to Shangri-La instead of right smack in the middle where there is a scale that is clearly established.

AoD
 
It certainly overpowers the Royal Alex (and at the very least, draws your eyes upwards and away).
 
The new renderings - from vantage points some distance from the tower - show how the eye will, from a distance, first and foremost make connections between the Theatre Park tower and the strong verticals of other tall buildings. This is especially true of Shangri-La, while the visual weight of the TIFF/Metro Hall group of buildings is roughly balanced by the weight of the lower buildings, including the Royal Alex, on the north side of King ( seen in that east side of Simcoe perspective ). It would have been interesting to see renderings of the field of vision that pedestrians will enjoy when they're on King Street itself close to the tower - with the Royal Alex and the other buildings of that height stretching away on both sides contrasted with the visually foreshortened tower set back from King. The differences in the foreshortening effect is already quite dramatic in the two new renderings anyway, with the more southerly perspective ( from Metro Square ) making the tower appear taller and slimmer. A rendering of the perspective from street level on King would show how much shorter it will appear.
 
I like this proposal quite a bit. I love the ribbons on the side, and the roof element fits right in and is a really nice mask for (what I assume is) the mechanical box on top. I don't normally like the glass box, but this one plays nicely with the variation on a theme for Mr. Clewes.

I know the park in front is considered an important piece of the design, but it seems quite redundant to me to put a small park across the street from another much larger park.

Instead of this small park, I would add a podium that would contain a space for theatre/music performances. With Roy Thomson across the street and the Royal Alex next door, this could be an opportunity for great small venue, something a bit more intimate in size than either of these two spaces.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top