enrigue8 said:
What would be amazing from Oxford is to decide to convert one office tower into a condo tower. It would be amazing and with such an amazing and powerful architecture, it would sell like hot cakes. Not only it will sell fast, but it would be profitable and generate a strong return on investment for the company. With such a location and with a so iconic design, Oxford could charge a huge extra premium for their potential condos.
It would also be an wonderful and necessary addition to Toronto's boring skyline in a close future.

I know that I am a poor dreamer, but it would be awesome if Oxford could think about it. I know that the developer will never see my message even in my craziest dreams, but it's not forbidden to dream. 😎
Click to expand...
There is two residential towers planned as part of this development if I’m not mistaken. Based on the renderings above, I wouldn’t hold my breath on powerful architecture that’s going to positively impact torontos public realm. At least not at street level imo.
 
I will never understand why all new parks are so bad. No one wants strange shapes, concrete, or stairs. They want grass to sit on and sports facilities like basketball and tennis courts or areas like the turf at canoe landing.

Look at the good parks - Trinity - Grass and tennis courts. Coronation - Grass and Baseball diamond. Stanley - Grass, basketball, baseball. No concrete in any of them. No stupid shapes. 60% of this park is unusable.
Park.PNG
 
kmac12 said:
I will never understand why all new parks are so bad. No one wants strange shapes, concrete, or stairs. They want grass to sit on and sports facilities like basketball and tennis courts or areas like the turf at canoe landing.

Look at the good parks - Trinity - Grass and tennis courts. Coronation - Grass and Baseball diamond. Stanley - Grass, basketball, baseball. No concrete in any of them. No stupid shapes. 60% of this park is unusable. View attachment 407234
Click to expand...
These parks are made for tourists not for locals lol!
 
kmac12 said:
No one wants strange shapes, concrete, or stairs. They want grass to sit on and sports facilities like basketball and tennis courts or areas like the turf at canoe landing.
Click to expand...

Speak for yourself. Not everyone wants to go to a park to have a picnic or play sports. Some people like having somewhere interesting to go for a walk. Parks like these are also gold mine for photography. Not just city photography but couples/portrait sessions too. I welcome parks like this with open arms and find the parks you describe as boring.
 
kmac12 said:
I will never understand why all new parks are so bad. No one wants strange shapes, concrete, or stairs. They want grass to sit on and sports facilities like basketball and tennis courts or areas like the turf at canoe landing.

Look at the good parks - Trinity - Grass and tennis courts. Coronation - Grass and Baseball diamond. Stanley - Grass, basketball, baseball. No concrete in any of them. No stupid shapes. 60% of this park is unusable. View attachment 407234
Click to expand...
This is not the current design.
 
kmac12 said:
I will never understand why all new parks are so bad. No one wants strange shapes, concrete, or stairs. They want grass to sit on and sports facilities like basketball and tennis courts or areas like the turf at canoe landing.

Look at the good parks - Trinity - Grass and tennis courts. Coronation - Grass and Baseball diamond. Stanley - Grass, basketball, baseball. No concrete in any of them. No stupid shapes. 60% of this park is unusable. View attachment 407234
Click to expand...

Agree 100%. Urban parks worldwide (Union Square Park, Parc La Fontaine, St. James Park) are built to be a serene oasis; a green escape from the busy, noisy, chaos of the city. How on earth can one relax in 'parks' like the one shown? It's a visual overload and not calming in any way. I'm getting a headache just looking at it. Most of the parks Toronto has built the last 15 years resemble jungle gyms for adults with A.D.D or those those IKEA ball rooms you drop your kids off at.. They're not built for people who appreciate nature.

I don't need a tennis court (although nice) but I definitely expect trees, flowers, and plants to dominate. Downtown I love Queen's Park, Allan Gardens, and the ravines but I'll be taking a giant pass on these ones.
 
Last edited:
Given that the park noted above is not what will happen; I don't wish to spend too much time discussing it.

I do think, it's worth saying this though.........

High-concept parks which integrate more elaborate landscape design features can absolutely work for the majority of people.

In the Problematic Park Design thread, I have discussed examples where this is clearly the case,
Notably, The Music Garden, and Village of Yorkville Park.

That does not detract from need to serve the community with 'natural spaces', playgrounds and sports fields alike; though these not be in the same spots as more elaborate park designs.

That said, High Concept Parks can equally fail, as illustrated by June Callwood Park, or Wellesley-McGill Park or Town Hall Square.

One part is understanding good park and public space design principles, another is understanding what a community needs in a space so that the correct type of park ends up in the correct space.

Then there is the matter, as always of getting execution right, and 'sweating the details'.
 
I think these people have spoken KMac 12 ! The majority of the rail deck parks that are going to be built. Will be based on a more touristy hang out look than for sporting events.
 
Now that thread has been bumped, despite all office towers and most condo buildings are mostly glass which drives me crazy, the shapes of these buildings are pretty damn, and I think fit into the skyline beautifully.
 
C-mac said:
Now that thread has been bumped, despite all office towers and most condo buildings are mostly glass which drives me crazy, the shapes of these buildings are pretty damn, and I think fit into the skyline beautifully.
Click to expand...
The level of glazing in condo's is changing with the newer Toronto Green Standard V4 due to energy targets. I have already noticed a difference since it came into effect in May. Not any specific requirements to reduce, but solid walls insulate better than glass.
 
cd concept said:
I think these people have spoken KMac 12 ! The majority of the rail deck parks that are going to be built. Will be based on a more touristy hang out look than for sporting events.
Click to expand...
Indeed. I'll admit that there seems to be more nuance to what makes a good or bad park.

Bad park designed like the one above - Lisgar park.
Bad park designed as grass - Paul Garfinkle park

Good parks designed as one above - Berczy
Good parks designed as grass - Stanley or Trinity
 
cd concept said:
These parks are made for tourists not for locals lol!
Click to expand...
Well it is but up against skydome. I'd like to see it even go a bit more 'tourist-y'. I think the back of cityplace butting up against the skydome is a lost opportunity. Could've tried animating the area with shops/bars and restaurants. Maybe taking places like Wrigley field as a cue.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top