Toronto College Park Redevelopment | 344.29m | 96s | GWL | Hariri Pontarini

The back side also looks pretty haphazard.
It looks like they are trying to match the old MacLean Hunter wing to the new part.

Also, they should wrap the south facade around the back so it doesn't look like facadism.
But that may be the intent since that south facade would have been intended to continue westwards.

nL2qsw8.jpeg
 
officedweller said:
The back side also looks pretty haphazard.
It looks like they are trying to match the old MacLean Hunter wing to the new part.

Also, they should wrap the south facade around the back so it doesn't look like facadism.
But that may be the intent since that south facade would have been intended to continue westwards.

nL2qsw8.jpeg
Click to expand...
Yeah this is weirdly disjointed, hopefully they clean it up by the final design.
 
Last edited:
Looks like vestiges of whats there currently.
 
An excellent Front Page story on how this project has evolved to date from Julian Mirabelli.

urbantoronto.ca

College Park Refinements Provide Insights to City Planning Process | UrbanToronto

The recent changes to the College Park Redevelopment proposal offer an opportunity to dive into Toronto's oftentimes confusing planning process to understand what impacts are studied, why adjustments are made, and how the results of this process are translated into the design of the building.
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca

There's nothing new for those following this one closely, but it does a good job of weaving together the why and how of various evolutions of the design to date.

****

One question/issue raised in Julian's piece is whether the 'solution' proposed by GWL here to the request for larger units, of knock-out panels will be accepted.

I'm of the view that it should not be, at least not at the scale proposed. There are too many, too small units, and the locations of panels mean awkward and less functional layouts for any combined spaces.

Better to build it properly the first time.
 
Last edited:
officedweller said:
The back side also looks pretty haphazard.
It looks like they are trying to match the old MacLean Hunter wing to the new part.

Also, they should wrap the south facade around the back so it doesn't look like facadism.
But that may be the intent since that south facade would have been intended to continue westwards.

nL2qsw8.jpeg
Click to expand...
I hate the back side of this development so much. It feels like this tower is opening its robe to flash the public with the mess that lays underneath
 
ComptoirGeneral said:
I hate the back side of this development so much. It feels like this tower is opening its robe to flash the public with the mess that lays underneath
Click to expand...
i’m actually the opposite. I like the back side of this development more than the front. The way everything looks coherent and then kind of steps up toward the towers is really nice imo. The towers themselves also have some nice detailing from the back.

The front though, even though I love the base, just feels a bit abrupt going from the base straight up to the towers.
 
Spooderman said:
i’m actually the opposite. I like the back side of this development more than the front. The way everything looks coherent and then kind of steps up toward the towers is really nice imo. The towers themselves also have some nice detailing from the back.

The front though, even though I love the base, just feels a bit abrupt going from the base straight up to the towers.
Click to expand...
YES keep it, it will be "cheapening" at the end according to the norm of this city....so no matter what get the most decent design at first!
 
That's bloody gorgeous, kashkanemusic, but overambitious (too costly) for Toronto:(, and I like them just as they are. They're a damned sight better than almost all other Toronto proposals, and I tend to be less critical of the average Toronto proposal than most UTers. Still, it wouldn't hurt to fire off your AI-generated renders to the applicant.;)
 
Strange Advance said:
That's bloody gorgeous, kashkanemusic, but overambitious (too costly) for Toronto:(, and I like them just as they are. They're a damned sight better than almost all other Toronto proposals, and I tend to be less critical of the average Toronto proposal than most UTers. Still, it wouldn't hurt to fire off your AI-generated renders to the applicant.;)
Click to expand...
Thank you! Although the current proposal is one of the best in Toronto right now it can be better and I hope it is improved, but yes I realize my dream scenario is not realistic for this project. This concept is simply a reflection of what I think the community wants aesthetically for the exterior.
 
kashkanemusic said:
Thank you! Although the current proposal is one of the best in Toronto right now it can be better and I hope it is improved, but yes I realize my dream scenario is not realistic for this project. This concept is simply a reflection of what I think the community wants aesthetically for the exterior.
Click to expand...
I love the effort, nice work, but if they actually built that, I would think I'm in Vegas or Dubai lol. That time in architecture has past, let's build something more contemporary that respects the base it is built from.
 
Civdis said:
I love the effort, nice work, but if they actually built that, I would think I'm in Vegas or Dubai lol. That time in architecture has past, let's build something more contemporary that respects the base it is built from.
Click to expand...
I mean neo deco is what's contemporary right now. I don't know if Id call the current functionalist esque design "respecting the base" Not to mention both of these architectural styles of both designs come from almost the same time period, Its not like art deco is some ancient relic. Idk Im just a dumb zoomer, not an architect, But either way I hope the design changes for something better🤞
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top