Toronto Aura at College Park | 271.87m | 78s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

RC8 said:
I understand a lot of people in the demographic of 15-40 years old love it, I spend a lot of time there myself. But its current configuration is inherently discriminatory against small kids and seniors,
Click to expand...

what's wrong with "discriminatory" against small kids and seniors? Not every neighbourhood and street is for small kids and seniors.
Following your logic, can I complain Rosedale is discriminatory against a 26 year old single male who likes busy lively streets and night life?

90% of Toronto is good for kids and seniors. Yonge st doesn't have to be.
 
Tewder:

I agree with your points, though I think I understand what DtTO may be getting at in that the issue with Yonge Street between Dundas and Bloor - with respect to growth and development at least - is the relative low density and short height of much of the building stock. This works better on Queen Street West or along many of the 'main street'-type thoroughfares of Toronto's downtown neighbourhoods but poses a problem in the downtown core where there are huge pressures for greater intensification.
Click to expand...

Except that Queen West (east of Spadina, which is the section we really have in mind) is about as far from the financial district as the section of Yonge south of, at best, College/Gerrard. Extending that argument to Bloor is bit of a stretch. Not to mention, Yonge is far more intensified than Queen even within said stretch.

I like what has been done at 5ive and think there are many other opportunities where this can be achieved, preserving the sort of vibrant mix you talk about, but I also agree that there is a lot of dated 'crap' that probably needs to be sacrificed at the alter of evolution and growth.
Click to expand...

The 5ive site doesn't necessarily have analogues all along Yonge in terms of stepback of the tower from the street proper. Sacrificing/accepting the need to replace dated crap doesn't equate to indiscriminate use of the tower built form.

AoD
 
Last edited:
BrianSolo said:
For me, it's the combination of beautiful AND ugly old buildings along with some beautiful AND ugly new buildings, some narrow and in places, some wide sidewalks that makes Yonge Street vibrant and exciting. Take away all the ugly buildings and replace them with great architecture, line the whole street with wide sidewalks and the human element will be lost. For me it's the balance between ugly & beautiful that makes Yonge so great. Now I'm not saying that I think the street should remain exactly as it is, but wide sidewalks and great architecture does not a vibrant city make.
Click to expand...

I disagree.
having ugly buildings doesn't make a street more enjoyable or "great". It is just a lame excuse.

I just came back from Backbay, Boston. It has some both beautiful and lively st such as Newbury st. I keep wondering how come we don't have a retail street like that. It is far better and more enjoyable than either Queen W or Yonge st, both of which have too many ugly buildings in horrible condition. Even Yorkville is not as nice.

Toronto needs more beautiful buildings and fewer ugly buildings. Let's admit it.
 
This is getting increasingly OT (I may yet move all the unrelated postings to the Yonge Street thread) but in any case I think we are talking about too many issues in cross current and equating apples to oranges here - architectural beauty of the building (beautiful? acceptable but bland? ugly?); building condition (well maintained vs. okay vs. dilapidated); building scale, public realm, building use, etc. Backbay in Boston wasn't beautiful because the buildings were tall - or the superlative quality of individual buildings taken in by themselves - but the confluence of consistent scaling, material, urban design - the very things that are/will be damaged in the drive to redevelop the stretch of Yonge without care.

AoD
 
Last edited:
DtTO said:
Oh ok, I guess we should tell NYC that 5th Ave is completely useless, and that they should put a nice big set of lawn chairs where Time Square is. Also, Michigan Avenue in Chicago is a horrible place to sit with lawn chairs, so maybe they should get rid of it altogether?
Click to expand...

Waaay to shoot yourself in the foot, mate. New York are putting chairs and widening sidewalks and pedestrian spaces at both Times Square and 5th Ave. What's more, after conducting surveys related to these improvements, people - especially locals - love them.

Celebrate Yonge, where lawn chairs and such were placed along the street and a lane removed, was a huge success that led to more profit for retailers, safer spaces for pedestrians, and a much better setting for socialisation and families.

New York, Times Square and 5th Ave:

Time+Square+%252856%2529.JPG


Times-Square.jpg


CarFreeBway-TSQ_1.jpg


new-york-madison-square-plaza.jpg


EDIT: I'll rephrase it. DtTO, it sounds like you want tall buildings to stroke your own ego, rather than to increase levels of well-being and social harmony. Less impolite.
 
Last edited:
bleu said:
what's wrong with "discriminatory" against small kids and seniors? Not every neighbourhood and street is for small kids and seniors.
Following your logic, can I complain Rosedale is discriminatory against a 26 year old single male who likes busy lively streets and night life?

90% of Toronto is good for kids and seniors. Yonge st doesn't have to be.
Click to expand...

0% of Toronto is good for kids and seniors who don't want to be stuck in a car.

And yes, your complaint about Rosedale is completely valid. It's OK if some neighbourhoods appeal to a demographic more than others, but if Yonge felt safe it would be instantly full of families. This is not about enticing people in, but about removing barriers that are forcing them away.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Except that Queen West (east of Spadina, which is the section we really have in mind) is about as far from the financial district as the section of Yonge south of, at best, College/Gerrard. Extending that argument to Bloor is bit of a stretch. Not to mention, Yonge is far more intensified than Queen even within said stretch.
Click to expand...

AoD,

Yet there is more to our notion of a downtown core than simply the financial district, to my mind at least. Yonge Street is our 'big city' thoroughfare in so many ways, and of course there is the subway line. It is dense, to be sure, and denser by far than Queen West, of course, but from the perspective of development and intensification it is far from 'built out' where these parameters are concerned...

... and is it really a stretch to extend the concept of Yonge as 'downtown' to Bloor given the dramatic urban transformation that is happening in the Bloor/Yonge area? I don't think so, and even less so as intensification continues to fill in the urban 'lowlands' between Dundas and Bloor.



AlvinofDiaspar said:
The 5ive site doesn't necessarily have analogues all along Yonge in terms of stepback of the tower from the street proper. Sacrificing/accepting the need to replace dated crap doesn't equate to indiscriminate use of the tower built form.

AoD
Click to expand...

Oh I agree with you completely. 5ive is just one creative way that this has been done successfully. I'd love to see more.

... and I agree with the reservations regarding the destructive nature of 'Southcore'-type development for Yonge. It'd be nice to see intensification that adds density yet preserves the vibrant pedestrian experience.
 
Tewder:

Yet there is more to our notion of a downtown core than simply the financial district, to my mind at least. Yonge Street is our 'big city' thoroughfare in so many ways, and of course there is the subway line. It is dense, to be sure, and denser by far than Queen West, of course, but from the perspective of development and intensification it is far from 'built out' where these parameters are concerned...

... and is it really a stretch to extend the concept of Yonge as 'downtown' to Bloor given the dramatic urban transformation that is happening in the Bloor/Yonge area? I don't think so, and even less so as intensification continues to fill in the urban 'lowlands' between Dundas and Bloor.
Click to expand...

Sure, but if you do that, then there is really no legitimate reason for not extending it along the E-W axis, especially considering that in all likelihood the primary pattern in the expansion of commercial developments. Which leads to the question - why do we proclaim Queen Street W as more or less sarcosanct (HCD) and not Yonge between say just Bloor to just north of College? It might be in a degraded state, but surely, the quality of the architecture matches, if not surpasses the offerings of QW HCD. And if you are making the argument of "built out" - the area along Queen Street is much less built out in comparison and is probably in a better position to absorb far more intensification.

AoD
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top