Toronto West Harbour City | ?m | 36s | Plaza | BDP Quadrangle

I don't know what the idea of this building is. Like ROCP there's some sort of quasi-deco ornamental thing going on that makes even less contextual sense here than on mid-downtown Bay Street. I don't find the proportions particularly elegant. It is bottom-heavy and occupies the land like some sort of invading army, when instead it could be light, and soar. I'm not convinced that mere napkin-folding novelty is a sufficient justification for what we actually get.
 
I don't mind this building, I just think it would have been better to have the terraces on the south side.

What I find annoying is people coming into this thread and bashing it. Especially when people have stated they've bought in the building, and they like it. That's just plain rude. If you don't have anything nice to say then don't say anything at all.
 
If one allows for neo-Deco all within eyeshot of Cityplace, it's quite acceptable. And I don't find it especially Soviet, let alone Putin/Lushkov-era, in its so-called retro excesses.

If this kind of style has to be done in such a location, let it be this way.
 
I guess what I find most unfortunate about WHC, WPC, and Malibu is that they're completely oblivious to Fort York. After all, isn't this area now being referred to as the Fort York neighbourhood? I wish they could have acknowledged their historic context at least minimally in some creative, respectful manner. Instead, they're totally blind to it. I'm also not clear how they relate to the lake despite their watery names. Or how they relate to each other. And their materials are pretty lame, all green glass and beige precast. It's like the Etobicoke waterfront mess all over again, more a cash-out by developers than proper city building, and perhaps betrays further failure on the part of our disfunctional planning dep't. But still, they're hardly commie blocks.
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
Would you have said the same thing about the Rwandan Genocide or some equally horrific historical episode?
Click to expand...

Your comparing the Rwandan Genocide to a person's architectural preference? How does that comparison have any relevance to this discussion? Are you suggesting that seeing this building brings about an equivalent sense of despair and revulsion? If so, perhaps I can suggest a good shrink or two...?
 
While comparing ugly buildings to genocide is absurd, equally absurd is the notion that because some people have bought into a building - esthetically and/or financially - others may not criticise it. This is a place for argument and critique about the urban environment, isn't it? Or is it a fan site for the development industry?
 
It is not at all absurd to critique and discuss and of course everyone won't agree, but disagreement should focus on the topic at hand, not on belittling those with whom a poster disagrees.
 
while I think each of the buildings mentioned by condovo is fine on its own, he makes some very good points about the disparate styles and lack of reference to Ft York. Though, I'm sure if we had some sort of faux historical neighbourhood there would be an endless list of bashers. Bottom line for me is that this stretch of Lakeshore W will finally have a sense of completion rather than the remnants of an industrial wasteland. Its a very visible part of the city for tourists...
 
I'm functionally stowing aside the "relationship to Fort York" issue; after all, by that measure, there's an argument that Cityplace-style highrising shouldn't have jumped Bathurst at all...
 
More an argument that any condo scale hereabouts should have been more along the lines of a northward continuation of Bathurst Quay than a westward continuation of Cityplace...
 
Surely, there must be a way to be contextual with being faux-historical. That's what I'm getting at. Towers are fine but some clear design standards, not just massing requirements, would have helped here, such as an insistence on brick instead of cream precast for example. These buildings seem much more connected to Fort York than Cityplace to me, or at least they should have been, simply based on their location. I'm not calling for Frontiertown or Fortyorkland, just a little acknowledgement and respect. But I guess it's too late now.
 
Re Bathurst Quay as a model: aside from the newest stuff, remember that it isn't "faux-historical" but rather, a continuation of St Lawrence Neighbourhood-style progressivism...
 
Apologies. I didn't 'get' your Bathurst Quay reference for some reason. Yes, I guess that's a fair take on my argument. But, anyhow, the point is moot. The buildings are there and they're not going anywhere.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top