yyzer
Senior Member
some interesting artwork has been installed behind the building.......pics by Taller, Better at SSC...
|
|
|
Irishmonk
Senior Member
^^Wow, that is a fantastic installation. Shows that the old mediums still have some life in them. I love 1 St Thomas; my only quibble is that it's far too short. Ideally it would tower over the MLC and everything else in that node.
WillC
New Member
You replied that to my post which said;
So I walked by there today to check it out, and wonder why you would make such an easily checkable erroneous statement. The main door with reception is tucked away in the back of the building off a large driveway.
Even more puzzling in a forum that is full of intelligent people is that it is rare in any of the building threads here for anyone to mention anything about the social impact or town planning effect of any of the many high rises that posters rhapsodize about. It suggests the narrow focus of architects, and those who would like to be, that the social effects are seen here as of little consequence.
greenleaf
Senior Member
Many homes have a private driveway, so why can't a condo?
It's true that the building is very inwardly focused at ground level.
What kinds of social effects are you concerned about with this building?
WillC
New Member
All condos that I've seen have private driveways. It's not just that they have a private driveway. The remarkable thing about this building to me, is that, though it is situated in a great walking area, visitors seem to be expected to arrive by car. To confirm what was the main door, I walked through the driveway. As I did so, I had dodge an oncoming car, whose driver acted as if no one had any business walking there. There is a smaller door on St. Thomas, but that was locked, and presumably is only usable by residents.
Now that most people are trying to de-emphasize the car that seems odd.
My remarks about the lack of attention paid the social effects of condos was more about the general content of this forum, then to this specific thread. That huge subject is what I hoped to learn about here. In order to reply to your post, I relooked the topic on google, and I still couldn't find anything. The social effects of this massive change of intensive condo construction that has occurred lately isn't covered anywhere that I can find.
The thing I've noticed is on Bay Street north of Gerrard to Bloor. That is an area I've always found like a dead zone with few pedestrians, and struggling stores which seem to be crying out for custom. Over the last decade, as condos have sprung up, we kept waiting for the street life which we thought they would bring. Having 10,000's of people living on the street hasn't made much difference. Proximity to Yonge St. may be a factor here, but not the only one.
The idea of gated communities that we find in the suburbs has repulsed many people. Condos, and some heavily protected apartments, are like vertical gated communities. They add little to the community around them. As you pointed out, this building is one of the most inward looking of them all.
I read on some post here that this forum was inspired by Jane Jacobs. Surely she was interested in the way that our constructions influence the kind of lives we live.
Ramako
Moderator
Those kinds of discussions are sprinkled throughout the forum within each of the various building threads. Admittedly, it's hard to find that content among dozens of pages of architectural discussion, but they're there.
For example, you bring up the topic of the effect that condo construction along Bay north of Gerrard has on street life and the pedestrian experience. If you actually read the threads on projects in that area (Murano, Burano, ROCP, U Condos, and various others) from the beginning, I can guarantee that you'll find that this topic has been discussed extensively. For now, there's little more that can be said about this issue until construction is completed and we can see the real results.
Last edited:
greenleaf
Senior Member
I live down the street from 1 St. Thomas and I see many people leaving to and from the building on foot and not necessarily on car. I don't think the design of this building inherently implies that one enters and exits only by driving, although the design probably doesn't help matters.
Regarding Bay Street, I think that it serves a different purpose than Yonge Street. It is full of people and I do see lots of people walking along the street, including myself. I don't think it is dead. Because the street and sidewalks are both wider than what you would find on Yonge, it perhaps appears to have less human traffic. In addition, the retail you find along there is for a more local purpose, rather than for the city at-large, which is what you find along Yonge.
Regarding Bay Street, I think that it serves a different purpose than Yonge Street. It is full of people and I do see lots of people walking along the street, including myself. I don't think it is dead. Because the street and sidewalks are both wider than what you would find on Yonge, it perhaps appears to have less human traffic. In addition, the retail you find along there is for a more local purpose, rather than for the city at-large, which is what you find along Yonge.
Last edited:
Oliver Tweed
Active Member
It's unrealistic to expect a change in street life just from the addition of one or two buildings. However, on a broader scale, higher density in a particular area will change it significantly.
As for this particular building, I like it. It's oozing class.
As for this particular building, I like it. It's oozing class.
WillC
New Member
Thanks for your replies, everyone. On the last post, I don't think that it's just one or two buildings on Bay from Gerrard northward. It has become Condo Canyon, with almost wall-to-wall condos as far as Yorkville.
I'll check out the buildings mentioned.
I'll check out the buildings mentioned.
buildup
Senior Member
"So I walked by there today to check it out, and wonder why you would make such an easily checkable erroneous statement. The main door with reception is tucked away in the back of the building off a large driveway."
The main pedestrian door is on St Thomas. The rear door seems larger because, as you point out, that is where reception is. It is typically visitors, or delivery vans etc who require reception staff. I think its a great idea to have moved this congestion around the back of the building. Note the congestion the Windsor Hotel causes by having all this activity out front.
Don't most 5th Avenue co-ops have similar sized, low key pedestrian entrances?
The main pedestrian door is on St Thomas. The rear door seems larger because, as you point out, that is where reception is. It is typically visitors, or delivery vans etc who require reception staff. I think its a great idea to have moved this congestion around the back of the building. Note the congestion the Windsor Hotel causes by having all this activity out front.
Don't most 5th Avenue co-ops have similar sized, low key pedestrian entrances?
casaguy
Senior Member
A few more shots to round out this thread...
Urban Shocker
Doyenne
ManuLife looks magnificent.
I got my hopes up when I saw what appeared to be a great conflagration breaking out on the roof of 1 St. Thomas.
I got my hopes up when I saw what appeared to be a great conflagration breaking out on the roof of 1 St. Thomas.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Agreed. One of the best in the city.
junctionist
Senior Member
Manulife looks very bold and rigid. The middle section for mechanical elements nicely breaks up the grid of windows before it gets monotonous.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
It's arguably the best rental building downtown too.