Toronto Ïce Condominiums at York Centre | 234.07m | 67s | Lanterra | a—A

Tewder said:
I definitely don't like the way it meets the street.
Click to expand...

I agree, because it will create quite an unbalanced streetscape "contrada" (comparison of building line placement / heights on either side of the street) on York Street when it is viewed against Maple Leaf Square.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Imbalance, disproportion, variation, etc...these are all largely good things when it comes to urban planning.
Click to expand...

This is something that concerns urban design more than it does planning. I agree that there is a need to provide variation in building design so as not to create monotony throughout the length of a street. I'm also sure you could argue the issues of balance and proportion either way depending on what you are trying to achieve (but we all know people in this forum routinely voice their opinions regarding disproportionately small podiums, the absence of building stepbacks, setbacks, etc. - and rightly so).

However, I can't accept what you wrote as a blanket statement. If I said that to my former professor at McGill he'd have a heart attack. That being said, this building is beautiful in its present design. I'm not trying to argue that. I'm just a critic.
 
Last edited:
I read the pdf regarding ICE's proposal. In the proposal, the city agreed with ICE's argument about the podium height. It's trying to find a medium between MLSs' tall podium. 9 stories and Infnity's podium. I think their's is 2-3 stories at 8 ft? Not sure. But anyhow, they're taking the medium route so it's taller than infinity's podium but shorter than MLS. That would create a gradual height difference rather than over power infinity.
 
I for one am not a podium fan, but since it is the ONLY way to build a condo in Toronto, I guess they are here to stay. In most cases they are primarily to make larger and more imposing entrances, but in reality we could really do without. Further more, at least in the case of this city, if they are intended to contain some sort of amenities they are nothing more than sad-sack spaces, ie: dry cleaners, banks, subway etc. To me podiums are equivalent to the suburban corner with the LCBO, shoppers, TD etc., in essence the same only in context are they different - same recipe.

IN the case of this building, the designers chose to put holes in their podium, add some grass on the roof and push the design to incorporate some curves and swoops somewhat. But why? Why couldn't, or should I say can't the towers be without? What dictates, or prescribes the necessity of such a spaces? In some cases I understand and I am able to see the benefits of a podium, but by and large it is the way they are done that offends me, but also that they are standard in 90% of all condo towers..

p5
 
Well, the podiums in the York St area are a bit more than that. Reason for the tall MLS podium is for a hotel and office component. Also they need space for a big supermarket and day care to serve the community there. I think there's also going to be a sports bar for sports fans at MLS.

Reason for Ice podium (as people call it) is to create a space for people to hang out. They could have easily just made the whole area into grass, but they put that on a higher level (green roof). There were requests to have the green roof available for access, however the builder says it's not sustainable if it were. Hence no access. However the roof would help against wind tunnels, rain and maybe snow. Due to all the tall towers, there may be wind tunnels, so the roof will shield it somewhat I think. When it rains people will have some sort of shelter as well. However there's a hole so sun can shine in. I think if the podium was too tall, it would be hard to use it as a shelter. As for future retail. I'm not sure what will be there. From the plans there seems to be around 8 retail areas between the 3 buildings.

The infinity podium has subway, dry cleaners and a bar? (shooters or something). They provide food and hang out for people in the area I guess.
 
For me the argument is less about podiums or not and more about a strong streetwall for our downtown urban thoroughfares, which can be achieved with or without podiums. As somebody mentioned this is probably more of a planning issue than a design one. Don't most cities have height regulations in place for core areas, or density regulations or regulations regarding how buildings must meet the streetwall? Toronto is at a stage where it would do well to have a little more of this in place to ensure that central downtown areas, and new areas of development such as south of the QEW in particular, are maximizing density. I'm completely willing to keep an open mind about this project but my initial reaction is that it feels a little like a tower in a park, and a little suburban like something you'd see in MCC. I also find the cheese hats and other elements to be a little kitschy and clumsy, sort of the 'cheddingtonista' (cheddar-ista?) version of modernism. I do like the shape of the towers though.
 
Tewder said:
For me the argument is less about podiums or not and more about a strong streetwall for our downtown urban thoroughfares, which can be achieved with or without podiums.
Click to expand...

I agree. That is what I was trying to get at.
 
Tewder said:
For me the argument is less about podiums or not and more about a strong streetwall for our downtown urban thoroughfares, which can be achieved with or without podiums. As somebody mentioned this is probably more of a planning issue than a design one. Don't most cities have height regulations in place for core areas, or density regulations or regulations regarding how buildings must meet the streetwall? Toronto is at a stage where it would do well to have a little more of this in place to ensure that central downtown areas, and new areas of development such as south of the QEW in particular, are maximizing density. I'm completely willing to keep an open mind about this project but my initial reaction is that it feels a little like a tower in a park, and a little suburban like something you'd see in MCC. I also find the cheese hats and other elements to be a little kitschy and clumsy, sort of the 'cheddingtonista' (cheddar-ista?) version of modernism. I do like the shape of the towers though.
Click to expand...

Two residential buildings at 217m and 180m and an office tower at 160m on this tiny parcel of land is not maximizing density? Comparisons to MCC? How can you even type that with a straight face?
 
ProjectEnd said:
Two residential buildings at 217m and 180m and an office tower at 160m on this tiny parcel of land is not maximizing density? Comparisons to MCC? How can you even type that with a straight face?
Click to expand...

Maximizing density would be building to the street and creating a strong street-wall, no? I didn't claim the design doesn't add any density.
 
Tewder said:
For me the argument is less about podiums or not and more about a strong streetwall for our downtown urban thoroughfares, which can be achieved with or without podiums. As somebody mentioned this is probably more of a planning issue than a design one. Don't most cities have height regulations in place for core areas, or density regulations or regulations regarding how buildings must meet the streetwall? Toronto is at a stage where it would do well to have a little more of this in place to ensure that central downtown areas, and new areas of development such as south of the QEW in particular, are maximizing density. I'm completely willing to keep an open mind about this project but my initial reaction is that it feels a little like a tower in a park, and a little suburban like something you'd see in MCC. I also find the cheese hats and other elements to be a little kitschy and clumsy, sort of the 'cheddingtonista' (cheddar-ista?) version of modernism. I do like the shape of the towers though.
Click to expand...

Well you sort-of did. Stating that you must 'keep an open mind' about this development and comparing it to 'suburban' MCC speaks to a mind which is unsatisfied with the density we are getting in Ice. When Seagram went up people couldn't believe that there was a plaza in front - soon after, tower-on-plaza architecture became en vogue and now, with BAC almost completed, we can see that this model is still quite prevalent today. Perhaps a successful Ice could provoke a similar paradigm shift in the way we design 'urban' spaces.
 
If we created so many street walls, where will people get breathing space? Opening up the area with a roof podium creates a space for people to hang out and enjoy the fresh air. I think having a street wall in the area isn't appropriate because the area is so pact and intruding, there's no space to give back to the people to hang out or breath. It might as well be part of the financial core if it was street walled as well. When MLS is occupied, union station entrance opens, Telus and 18 York gets occupied, and Ice commercial tower is built the area will be really busy. I even wonder if it can contain so many people especially during games.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top