WislaHD
Superstar
Thank you SvN!
Let's do it.
Let's do it.
Toronto 110 Adelaide Street East | 217.6m | 65s | Stafford | Arcadis
- Thread starter ferusian
- Start date
Koops65
Senior Member
DSC
Superstar
Member Bio
- Joined
- Jan 13, 2008
- Messages
- 18,630
- Reaction score
- 25,380
- Location
- St Lawrence Market Area
Don't forget. These are RENDERINGS and we all know (or should know) they are not necessarily what will actually be built. Lots of time for The Cheapening and if I were you I would keep my excitement down a bit.
condovo
Senior Member
A 42-storey building sticking out like a sore thumb midblock doesn't look like good urban form to me.
ushahid
Senior Member
there is another proposal submitted recently that is 149m and very close to this one and i think there will be more in the few years.
urbantoronto.ca
Celeste Condominiums | 136m | 39s | Alterra | Sweeny &Co
Not a bad building to keep, but the sidewalk is rather narrow there, and the area would benefit from more space at the intersection. Furthermore, it’s a relatively simple structure that has fewer details that could be lost if rebuilt (i.e. brickwork). As such, I wonder if it would make more...
condovo
Senior Member
^^^ 125 George St is 2 or more blocks east of this and it's at the corner, not midblock.
Blixtein
Active Member
Dunno, everything west of this proposal all the way to Church St. is atrocious crap that should be demolished.
cd concept
Senior Member
What a gorgeous looking building! A change from all those blue, green, black and white buildings being built . I think this building complements the church and Park across the street. As you can see in the photos from the previous page with its earth tone colours etc.
Last edited:
3Dementia
Senior Member
I'm seeing red... in a good way.
Can't see a St. James view corridor issue (the proposal is east enough, and if you use a wide angle anywhere downtown you'll might be adding stuff to the frame).
The early placeholder render says red (hoping for brick or brick "adjacent") and the building could use some rethinks (no unresolved mechanical boxes any more please), but I like the location/massing for this.
Paid for and approved by the Committee for more red (and yellow) masonry downtown.
Red/yellow are the new black/grey.
Can't see a St. James view corridor issue (the proposal is east enough, and if you use a wide angle anywhere downtown you'll might be adding stuff to the frame).
The early placeholder render says red (hoping for brick or brick "adjacent") and the building could use some rethinks (no unresolved mechanical boxes any more please), but I like the location/massing for this.
Paid for and approved by the Committee for more red (and yellow) masonry downtown.
Red/yellow are the new black/grey.
AlbertC
Superstar
tbone
New Member
Is approval of this project a "slam dunk"? How much do public comments count? IMHO, not a bad looking building overall, but the height seems grossly excessive for the immediate environs. Especially the historical structures.
No, it's not a slam dunk. @condovo's concerns as per above will likely be mirrored at the City. Public comments do count to a degree, (assuming they are reasonable and find a sympathetic, similarly aligned ear at the City), so watch for chances to participate in the feedback.
42
tbone
New Member
One wonders, given the Coronavirus situation - and uncertainties over the length and depth of the associated economic slowdown - whether developers in the early stages of approval for such projects will put things on hold until the situation "shakes out". Seems that moving ahead with large projects, which take years to come to fruition in the best of times, just became much riskier.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
It's because of those long timelines that developers don't often worry about economic downturns, unless they suspect they will be long term.
AlbertC
Superstar
A couple add on photos to show how the current building backs onto Lombard St:
