caltrane74
Senior Member
borgo100 must have grabbed this off the college park website ( SSP_)
Toronto Aura at College Park | 271.87m | 78s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza
Big Daddy
Senior Member
Who is "we"?? I know a lot of people who think Zeidler's work is great! can you name/describe a few better designed facilities?
MetroMan
Senior Member
Can't argue with that! Busy, well integrated podium and a tall non boxy tower with plenty of setbacks... and it brings a lot of people living in this stretch of Yonge... Zanzibar has got its days numbered.
p5connex
Active Member
I am not sure if you are making a general remark about bland Canadian architecture or about Zeidler, but in any case, the OSC is designed by Moriyama and Teshima Architects.
The argument about Zeidler, or even Clewes for that matter being great architects might be pushing it a tad- I think decent, with moments of good is more likely.
p5
Spoonman
Active Member
Methinks that honour belongs to Sydney Smith at UofT
Ahab
New Member
I doubt Zanzibar will be moving any time soon. In my view, that stretch of Yonge is problematic because of Evergreen and Covenant House being so close. They're magnets for pimps, drug dealers, etc.
Hypnotoad
Senior Member
I believe that these two institutions can live along side a revitalized "downtown yonge". As for the pimps, drug dealers and other Big Slice hanger-oners I see their days as numbered.
Eventually, one would expect that Ryerson's master plan, rising land values and developers eager to piggy-back on the successes of projects like Pantages, The Met, and ROCP will look to Yonge/Gerrard as a prime spot for revitalization. Could this mean the displacement of Covanent House and Evergreen? Maybe.
But Zanzibar might not have to move. One just needs to look at the Brass Rail and its proximity to Yonge/Bloor. It's probably safe too, for now.
Mike in TO
Senior Member
The 75-storey Aura condo tower is sleek, smooth and predictable
JOHN BENTLEY MAYS
From Friday's Globe and Mail
November 30, 2007
In a development that's definitely overdue, the downtown stretch of Toronto's Yonge Street is finally coming of age. For much too long, Yonge below Bloor Street has been a strip of dumpy shops, gadget stores, doughnut huts, and other enterprises drawn to the area by cheap rents and by the mobs of kids who throng the avenue. That's hardly a fate worthy of the mighty road that city founder John Graves Simcoe pushed into the northern wilderness more than 200 years ago.
Like many other changes sweeping Toronto, the transformation of Yonge is being driven by the condominium craze. The 80-storey condo and hotel tower slated for the southeast corner of Bloor and Yonge, though not as architecturally daring as it should be, is nevertheless a building with the right heft and height for its strategically important site in the urban fabric. And here comes another Yonge Street tower with similar oomph: a glass-skinned residential building called Aura that the Canderel Stoneridge development group intends to drop on the northwest corner of Yonge and Gerrard Street East.
However you look at it, Aura is big. At 75 storeys, the project will top everything in the nearby financial district, and most new buildings projected to rise in Toronto's downtown over the next few years. There will be 1.1 million square feet of residential space in the tower, and, with the adjacent College Park retail complex included, more than 360,000 square feet of shopping.
But Aura isn't just big. It's also hard. An artist's rendering of the Yonge Street facade shows a massive glass-fronted retail podium pushed up against the sidewalk. On a less-important Toronto street, this strong, high-style treatment would probably seem too emphatic and dramatically impersonal. On Yonge, however, it will almost certainly work, creating an appropriately tough street-wall alongside the thoroughfare, and lending chic, high-voltage visual electricity to the streetscape.
At the recent press conference that introduced Aura, Canderel Stoneridge president Michael La Brier made much of the presumably rigorous process the design, by architect Berardo E. Graziani, was put through. The plan was first passed by Eberhard Zeidler, the celebrated Toronto designer of Ontario Place and the Eaton Centre, and architect René Menkès.
The scheme next went before the well-known Toronto architect Bruce Kuwabara, and U.S. designers Jon Pickard and Josh Chaiken.
All this was done, we were told, with the full participation of Toronto's planning and design officials.
Mr. La Brier said that this review process, "which we entered into willingly, should serve as a model for the city in all its future high-profile, high-impact projects. With a proviso to market conditions, Toronto must continue to demand more of its developers and their designs, and it must subject them to the unassailable scrutiny of an independent review panel as a basic part of doing business."
These are admirable sentiments, and we can hope Mr. La Brier's example is followed by other developers as Toronto's tall buildings continue to move from the drawing board into reality.
So how did it happen that Mr. Graziani's tower design survived all this high-powered vetting and review as the underwhelming, ordinary thing it is? Apart from the podium (which I like), Aura resembles any tall, glass office skyscraper from the 1970s: sleek and smooth, plain, "elegant" in an utterly safe, predictable way. Though its developer sincerely means it to be one, Aura is no argument for the value of design review. In fact, the scheme leaves you wondering: Why bother?
Looking just at the Aura renderings, you might never know we live in a revolutionary moment in the history of the skyscraper. Architects in the United States and Europe, armed with new design and construction technologies, are injecting a new romanticism into the art of building tall. Towers can bend and twist and shimmer, they can descend to the ground in great folds and pleats of curtain wall. The convex curve of Aura's central shaft is a nod in the direction of this romantic idea, but one that is far too timid.
Downtown Toronto, and especially Yonge Street, needs more very tall buildings, to lift the skyline and strongly define the street grid. But we need these skyscrapers to swing to the rhythms of the best contemporary international design, and celebrate the vibrancy of the city we are becoming.
JOHN BENTLEY MAYS
From Friday's Globe and Mail
November 30, 2007
In a development that's definitely overdue, the downtown stretch of Toronto's Yonge Street is finally coming of age. For much too long, Yonge below Bloor Street has been a strip of dumpy shops, gadget stores, doughnut huts, and other enterprises drawn to the area by cheap rents and by the mobs of kids who throng the avenue. That's hardly a fate worthy of the mighty road that city founder John Graves Simcoe pushed into the northern wilderness more than 200 years ago.
Like many other changes sweeping Toronto, the transformation of Yonge is being driven by the condominium craze. The 80-storey condo and hotel tower slated for the southeast corner of Bloor and Yonge, though not as architecturally daring as it should be, is nevertheless a building with the right heft and height for its strategically important site in the urban fabric. And here comes another Yonge Street tower with similar oomph: a glass-skinned residential building called Aura that the Canderel Stoneridge development group intends to drop on the northwest corner of Yonge and Gerrard Street East.
However you look at it, Aura is big. At 75 storeys, the project will top everything in the nearby financial district, and most new buildings projected to rise in Toronto's downtown over the next few years. There will be 1.1 million square feet of residential space in the tower, and, with the adjacent College Park retail complex included, more than 360,000 square feet of shopping.
But Aura isn't just big. It's also hard. An artist's rendering of the Yonge Street facade shows a massive glass-fronted retail podium pushed up against the sidewalk. On a less-important Toronto street, this strong, high-style treatment would probably seem too emphatic and dramatically impersonal. On Yonge, however, it will almost certainly work, creating an appropriately tough street-wall alongside the thoroughfare, and lending chic, high-voltage visual electricity to the streetscape.
At the recent press conference that introduced Aura, Canderel Stoneridge president Michael La Brier made much of the presumably rigorous process the design, by architect Berardo E. Graziani, was put through. The plan was first passed by Eberhard Zeidler, the celebrated Toronto designer of Ontario Place and the Eaton Centre, and architect René Menkès.
The scheme next went before the well-known Toronto architect Bruce Kuwabara, and U.S. designers Jon Pickard and Josh Chaiken.
All this was done, we were told, with the full participation of Toronto's planning and design officials.
Mr. La Brier said that this review process, "which we entered into willingly, should serve as a model for the city in all its future high-profile, high-impact projects. With a proviso to market conditions, Toronto must continue to demand more of its developers and their designs, and it must subject them to the unassailable scrutiny of an independent review panel as a basic part of doing business."
These are admirable sentiments, and we can hope Mr. La Brier's example is followed by other developers as Toronto's tall buildings continue to move from the drawing board into reality.
So how did it happen that Mr. Graziani's tower design survived all this high-powered vetting and review as the underwhelming, ordinary thing it is? Apart from the podium (which I like), Aura resembles any tall, glass office skyscraper from the 1970s: sleek and smooth, plain, "elegant" in an utterly safe, predictable way. Though its developer sincerely means it to be one, Aura is no argument for the value of design review. In fact, the scheme leaves you wondering: Why bother?
Looking just at the Aura renderings, you might never know we live in a revolutionary moment in the history of the skyscraper. Architects in the United States and Europe, armed with new design and construction technologies, are injecting a new romanticism into the art of building tall. Towers can bend and twist and shimmer, they can descend to the ground in great folds and pleats of curtain wall. The convex curve of Aura's central shaft is a nod in the direction of this romantic idea, but one that is far too timid.
Downtown Toronto, and especially Yonge Street, needs more very tall buildings, to lift the skyline and strongly define the street grid. But we need these skyscrapers to swing to the rhythms of the best contemporary international design, and celebrate the vibrancy of the city we are becoming.
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
I disagree with Johnny Boy.
Fortunately, peer review isn't about imposing someone else's idea on a design and remaking it completely, it is about bringing out the best in what is already there. Otherwise, what credibility would the process have, and who would submit to it? When Siamak Hariri publicly scolded Jack Diamond for his Corus office building and proposed something entirely different - a building that "went much further" and "cantilevered on the water" was his example of raising the bar higher - for instance, I think it was a questionable approach. Aura's architect is hardly one of the Beautiful People of the local architectural community, but the design review process seems to have brought out the best in him.
Fortunately, peer review isn't about imposing someone else's idea on a design and remaking it completely, it is about bringing out the best in what is already there. Otherwise, what credibility would the process have, and who would submit to it? When Siamak Hariri publicly scolded Jack Diamond for his Corus office building and proposed something entirely different - a building that "went much further" and "cantilevered on the water" was his example of raising the bar higher - for instance, I think it was a questionable approach. Aura's architect is hardly one of the Beautiful People of the local architectural community, but the design review process seems to have brought out the best in him.
caltrane74
Senior Member
Maldive's render of the South East from SSP
Here is the context for the updated rendering:
Here is the context for the updated rendering:
Hypnotoad
Senior Member
The article makes good points about the revitalization of Yonge and the need for a commanding, awesome streetwall. But his points about the peer-review not doing enough to change the tower's design is a bit much. Really, the design review has done amazing things with this building, especially with the podium and integration with surrounding buildings (especially the College Park building). I think it is unreasonable to expect that the entire design would be dramatically reconfigured.
Having said that, looking at Maldive's rendering above I will be pleased when this building goes up and resembles that picture. While the building may not be as daring as some of the supertalls in Asia or the new movements in Chicago/New York, there is really no denying that this will be a great addition to Toronto's skyline. It is not too bold but it is not too dull either. I'm not one to opt for babysteps but I think this development works. Kudos to the developers for going through the design review process.
Anyone know if there will be below-ground retail?
Having said that, looking at Maldive's rendering above I will be pleased when this building goes up and resembles that picture. While the building may not be as daring as some of the supertalls in Asia or the new movements in Chicago/New York, there is really no denying that this will be a great addition to Toronto's skyline. It is not too bold but it is not too dull either. I'm not one to opt for babysteps but I think this development works. Kudos to the developers for going through the design review process.
Anyone know if there will be below-ground retail?
urbandreamer
recession proof
The design review was a joke: a bunch of 3rd rate architects (Zeidler?) timidly saying something like "hey CS ditch that kitch at street level." They did, but did little else. Auru is blander than a Saturn Aura.
DTGeek
Active Member
Agreed. It's not like this is the last tall condo Toronto is going to build. We shouldn't settle for mediocrity, but this isn't mediocre, just not perfect enough for some people I guess. Same with 1 Bloor. Going forward, I assume we'll start to see a building of this height being proposed every year or two at least, and eventually we will start to see the occasional very daring if not spectacular supertalls.
I'd take this over MOST of the tall Chicago residential buildings, frankly. 15 storey above ground parking garages don't really do it for me.
AndreaPalladio
Senior Member
Most of the tall residential buildings in Chicago are as bland as City Place.
Sir Novelty Fashion
Senior Member
I love the way that a bunch of kids on an Internet forum have somehow decided that Zeidler is a "third-rate architect." Believe it or not, he won't go down in history for having designed Trump.
JBM (who, as I recall, dipped his toes into this forum and ran screaming) is right on this count, I think. A large, dreary building. And judging by Maldive's rendering, could this be the return of the Stinson Speed Stick?
JBM (who, as I recall, dipped his toes into this forum and ran screaming) is right on this count, I think. A large, dreary building. And judging by Maldive's rendering, could this be the return of the Stinson Speed Stick?