Mongo
Senior Member
Would the City allow a floor plate 2/3 the size, with a height 50% greater (290m) to have the same total floor area? Or would shadowing on Jesse Ketchum Park become an issue?
Last edited:
Toronto Eight Cumberland | 170m | 51s | Great Gulf | a—A
- Thread starter urbandreamer
- Start date
Would the City allow a floor plate 2/3 the size, with a height 50% greater (290m) to have the same total floor area? Or would shadowing on Jesse Ketchum Park become an issue?
Shadowing would become an issue. Besides, the City would not want this building higher than a line drawn from the top of The One (assuming is gets approved) to the top of 1 Yorkville, as they want buildings to reduce in height as they move away from the peaks.
42
42
maestro
Senior Member
Don't think it matters. It would kill the margins.
urbandreamer
recession proof
Great Gulf's next project.
Hope they get the HP(A) Sauce crew to redesign the window dressing.
Hope they get the HP(A) Sauce crew to redesign the window dressing.
It will be a Phantom/Great Gulf joint venture. P+S have redesigned the building.
42
42
stjames2queenwest
Senior Member
Here's hoping it twists like the panel suggested...
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Well that's interesting and far better than the first attempt. I'm now wondering how the top two thirds has been resolved...
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Also worth noting that this new version appears to have balconies.
Canadian Chocho
Active Member
No more heritage facades?
Edit: Realized the point of view of the rendering is on Cumberland whoops!
Edit: Realized the point of view of the rendering is on Cumberland whoops!
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I made the same mistake at first, so you're not alone there.
UrbanFervour
Active Member
But there are still tacked-on facades... facades that don't even exist yet, and don't pay homage to (or even try to improve on) the scale and feel of yorkville... It's like they got told to pay attention to the street-level realm and in response they're making fun of facadism. The scale differential between the tower and the facades looks to be completely off... Im not some height fanboy, but just feel this site calls for a super skinny, very tall building rather than a medium-floorplate box, propped up on top of phony facades.
maestro
Senior Member
The facades are strange but, there's also something compelling about them. It is at least an attempt at individualized storefronts. Phony feels very harsh.
As horrible the old design was, I felt it had good form. I'd prefer to see the skinny form of the new Foster design. Would be a tough sell on here.
As horrible the old design was, I felt it had good form. I'd prefer to see the skinny form of the new Foster design. Would be a tough sell on here.
88drums
Active Member
Agreed with @maestro. Phony would be tacky neo-Victorian rowhouses trying to blend in. These, on the other hand, look like a tasteful attempt to highlight and soften the individual retail units.
Besides, based on the precedents set by recent projects, what alternative might we expect? An unthoughtful continuation of the podium's curtain wall right down to the sidewalk? The less of that the better IMO.
Besides, based on the precedents set by recent projects, what alternative might we expect? An unthoughtful continuation of the podium's curtain wall right down to the sidewalk? The less of that the better IMO.
modernizt
Senior Member
Yikes. What is even going on there? Mish-mash of competing ideas that don't sit well with each other and don't seem to make sense, and I won't even say anything about the tacked-on masonry portions.
This looks like the sort of schematic design that gets set aside and never makes it into public view.
This looks like the sort of schematic design that gets set aside and never makes it into public view.