Toronto 75 on The Esplanade | 99.97m | 29s | Harhay | a—A

[ProjectEnd]

 

[mburrrrr]

I forgot to post this time lapse video from Feb 20, 2021 of the crane removal.

75 The Esplanade - time lapse crane removal

Shared using GoPro

gopro.com

March 30

Feb 25

 

[cc46]

From the south west, April 10th 2021.

 

[Jeff Morgan]

Another view from the south.

 

[mburrrrr]

April 4,8,12,14&18

 

[Rascacielo]

Today

 

[vatche]

Toronto fails at the street level every time with these buildings.

 

[LUVIT!]

I was just admiring all the pics and thinking how pleasant this all the above photos are.

 

[DSC]

Toronto fails at the street level every time with these buildings.

You say "Toronto fails". I would say Toronto IS failed as the problems with street level of buildings is really the fault of the developer NOT the City. The City has no real way to make developers build a certain type of retail space so they build what is convenient and it is (predictably) rented by folk who can basically work anywhere - like nail salons!

 

[vatche]

cant the city demand more from the architects and developers?

 

[DavidCapizzano]

I think the ground floor here is quite nice? The suspended awning is neat - it's also not finished yet? This is miles away from being bad

 

[Northern Light]

cant the city demand more from the architects and developers?

The City has some options.............

But it can't dictate aesthetics.

It's also not supposed to micromanage beyond enforcing very clear zoning/bylaw rules.

The City can cap the size of a given store; it's debatable whether the City could regulate formula retail, but it could try.

But requiring granularity of facade treatments, as one example, is probably not on under current rules; though staff could could certainly make clear that that would be viewed positively.

While the City can play mean, or try to extract aesthetic benefits under 'section 37' rules..........that's far from ideal.

It's also not a great use of Section 37/community benefits.

(think about the idea that you could purposefully propose an ugly building; then negotiate to make your building prettier as a public benefit)

It's also just not that practical on most developments.

In the end, the City is fairly reliant on developers to deliver good design.

****

Provincial planning rules could be altered to give the City greater maneuvering room. But I have mixed views about that, as it turns planners into armchair architecture critics.......
Or, it leads to a City standard definition of good design, leading to a different form of problem.

 

[DSC]

cant the city demand more from the architects and developers?

Simple answer. No. The City can only demand developers follow the rules, and LPAT helps them to beat them.

 

[condovo]

I've walked around this building countless times over the years. It's not a failure at street level at all. The retail is active and it works (pre and post COVID).

 

[DSC]

I've walked around this building countless times over the years. It's not a failure at street level at all. The retail is active and it works (pre and post COVID).

Not sure which building you are referring to but 75 The Esplanade has not yet opened so if the retail is active it is active with construction workers.