Toronto Seventy5 Portland | ?m | 11s | Freed | Core Architects

TKTKTK said:
The two buildings that kicked this conversation off are hardly strip malls and McDonald's drive-throughs. If you don't want to seriously discuss something why not just ignore the thread?
Click to expand...

I apologize if I sounded condescending - I was using your logic in the same subjective way that you are using it. It's heartening to know that there are people out there like yourself who care about the city and it's history.

I have nothing against saving old buildings. I'm very much in favour of preserving our architectural heritage when it is worth saving but we can not save every mediocre building (again subjective) just because they are old. I think there has to be some architectural merit. As I mentioned a couple of days ago in the 400 Wellington thread, I was saddened at the loss of the garage building which was definitely worth saving. Inflicting a condo atop 500 Wellington is hardly preserving the buildings architectural integrity. There are always going to be losses if any neighbourhood is going to experience organic growth and I think the trick is to sacrifice the unworthy in order to preserve the good. You and I differ on what constitutes the good. I would like to see most of that block of Wellington Street preserved, but with a few exceptions and 500 falls into that category, much the way Camden Street does as well.
 
jaborandi said:
I have nothing against saving old buildings. I'm very much in favour of preserving our architectural heritage when it is worth saving but we can not save every mediocre building (again subjective) just because they are old. I think there has to be some architectural merit. As I mentioned a couple of days ago in the 400 Wellington thread, I was saddened at the loss of the garage building which was definitely worth saving. Inflicting a condo atop 500 Wellington is hardly preserving the buildings architectural integrity. There are always going to be losses if any neighbourhood is going to experience organic growth and I think the trick is to sacrifice the unworthy in order to preserve the good. You and I differ on what constitutes the good. I would like to see most of that block of Wellington Street preserved, but with a few exceptions and 500 falls into that category, much the way Camden Street does as well.
Click to expand...

I understand where you're coming from, and It's not as if I'm trying to exhault 500 Wellington as some major tragedy in the waiting. And further, I really don't like the idea of creating a museum city where nothing new can be built because of what it might obscure or demolish. But at the same time, I worry that we're too strict with what we consider save-worthy, and maybe not imaginative enough with how to save things.

The Crystal and Alsop's OCAD hint at what could be done with relating new buildings to old. Neither is a perfect solution, but they both do a lot more than just gut the interior and hide, parasitically, inside.

One of the hallmarks of Toronto's streetscapes are their diverse, scrappy, discordant nature. Heritage buildings next to modernist pavilions within sight of ancient church spires and the CN Tower. We're a city made up of multiple cultures and ethnicities all living amongst each other. I wish that quality would inform our architectural styles more often. Rather than reflexively using the "Toronto Modern" style (which we're very good at at times) it'd be nice to see a "Toronto Eclecticism" emerge, a style based on trying to marry both history and future. Hey, a guy can dream, right?

Back to 500 Wellington though. If it had been given another 20 years, it probably would have found its audience - there certainly aren't that many 30s/40s small industrial spaces left in the city proper (though there are a TON in some of the industrial waste-land areas of the city). Heck, it might even be appreciated for the novelty of using brick as more than just a veneer (I'm looking at you CityPlace!)
 
TKTKTK said:
The Crystal and Alsop's OCAD hint at what could be done with relating new buildings to old. Neither is a perfect solution, but they both do a lot more than just gut the interior and hide, parasitically, inside.

One of the hallmarks of Toronto's streetscapes are their diverse, scrappy, discordant nature. Heritage buildings next to modernist pavilions within sight of ancient church spires and the CN Tower. We're a city made up of multiple cultures and ethnicities all living amongst each other. I wish that quality would inform our architectural styles more often. Rather than reflexively using the "Toronto Modern" style (which we're very good at at times) it'd be nice to see a "Toronto Eclecticism" emerge, a style based on trying to marry both history and future. Hey, a guy can dream, right?
Click to expand...

Please, do dream on. We need dreamers in this city. I believe the perfect opportunity to realize your vision would be Spadina Avenue, with it's streetscape of 2 and 3-storey buildings begging for restoration with an imaginative intensification programme.

Some battles are worth fighting and some are just a lost cause and one needs to know where to compromise and where one's energy is best invested.
 
Re the Yonge/Bloor discussion meander: actually, there *is* a legit argument on behalf of that yellow brick 50s corner junk building--though it's less about heritage (duh) than Jane Jacobs-style messy ad hoc urbanism.

Note: "on behalf of" does not necessarily equate to "on behalf of saving". Still, don't be surprised if the built fact of 1 Bloor E makes one long for ye olde styleless squalour...
 
Photos taken January 14. They are going down three levels.

2193562479_050558d15e_b.jpg


Looking south with CityPlace in the background.
2193562465_62e78b5807_b.jpg
 
I think this is a fabulous thread with a lot of good discussion.
To be clear Seventy5 Portland was designed by Core Architects, the courtyard and the interior design was designed by Phillipe Starck.
 
I was talkin to someone at the Freed sales centre and they mentioned this building will be ready for occupancy before 550 Wellington. I was a bit surprised because 550 seems so much futhur along. I guess it has to do with the relative sizes.
 
Concerning what your contact said, that's rather surprising (and a little unbelievable) since 550 Wellington will rise quite quickly once it hits ground level. 75 Portland isn't even dug out as of yet. There are still months of construction to get to ground level.

75 Portland is a smaller project, but it is almost a year behind 550 Wellington.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top