Toronto Four Seasons Hotel and Private Residences Toronto | 203.9m | 52s | Lifetime | a—A

It's an example of how a lot of privately-owned public spaces fail as public spaces. They're designed to look good but not to actually attract people to use the space--cutting down on maintainence and liability. Such spaces aren't major gains for the city.
 
junctionist said:
It's an example of how a lot of privately-owned public spaces fail as public spaces. They're designed to look good but not to actually attract people to use the space--cutting down on maintainence and liability. Such spaces aren't major gains for the city.
Click to expand...

This space isn't designed for people to 'use', it's not a park. It's designed as something pretty to look at, like a flower bed. It's to be viewed from the courtyard as guests come and go, from the guest rooms above that overlook it, and from the street... or people can get a little closer along the path. It's not a fail.
 
Tewder said:
This space isn't designed for people to 'use', it's not a park. It's designed as something pretty to look at, like a flower bed. It's to be viewed from the courtyard as guests come and go, from the guest rooms above that overlook it, and from the street... or people can get a little closer along the path. It's not a fail.
Click to expand...

If all that was trying to be achieved was "something pretty to look at", Tewder, then perhaps it's not a fail. But what if the ambition had been higher? From Roman villas to Renaissance palazzi, architects have integrated "vehicular" and pedestrian entries with gardens and courtyards in which one experiences an integrated sequence and variety of open, semi-open and enclosed spaces, (with well thought out sight-lines), in which the sum is greater than the parts. None of the elements present at the Four Seasons relate to one another (or to the city at large in terms of the fire hall or the through block route from Yorkville to Scollard). Yes, it's a motor court, in a sense, not the courtyard and garden of the Palazzo Medici in Florence, but one could imagine that if Clewes and Cormier had truly collaborated instead of working in isolation, and had been instructed by their client to look to the historic vocabulary of Yorkville (Lothian Mews?) we would not have gotten such a disjointed, disappointing result.

Pity they weren't sent to the Four Seasons in Paris for public realm inspiration:

 
Last edited:
Tewder said:
This space isn't designed for people to 'use', it's not a park. It's designed as something pretty to look at, like a flower bed. It's to be viewed from the courtyard as guests come and go, from the guest rooms above that overlook it, and from the street... or people can get a little closer along the path. It's not a fail.
Click to expand...

If they wanted a flower bed then they should have built just a flower bed--not what's clearly some sort of public space with walking paths. It's a waste of space.
 
Tewder said:
This space isn't designed for people to 'use', it's not a park. It's designed as something pretty to look at, like a flower bed. It's to be viewed from the courtyard as guests come and go, from the guest rooms above that overlook it, and from the street... or people can get a little closer along the path. It's not a fail.
Click to expand...

If this space was only built for guests of the hotel and not for the rest of the city to enjoy, then yes, it is a FAIL. Any building that takes but gives nothing back is a huge fail. That is not the way to build great cities.

This space could have been so much better if they put that waterless fountain in the middle of the rose garden, turned on the water and surrounded it with beautiful benches. Don't wealthy people enjoy sitting in beautiful parks too? I'm sure their guests would have gotten much more use out of that dead space. Whenever I have gone there, the area seems so deserted, so in my opinion it's a dead zone and does nothing to animate that area. In fact, this whole building has created a lifeless area. It's not a pleasant place to walk. It just goes to show you how a building can look good in renderings but if it fails at street level, it destroys any animation on the street and fails at enlarging the retail footprint of Yorkville. This building was supposed to enliven Bay Street and help enlarge the retail strip north but it completely fails in that regard.
 
thecharioteer said:
But what if the ambition had been higher? From Roman villas to Renaissance palazzi, architects have integrated "vehicular" and pedestrian entries with gardens and courtyards in which one experiences an integrated sequence and variety of open, semi-open and enclosed spaces, (with well thought out sight-lines), in which the sum is greater than the parts. None of the elements present at the Four Seasons relate to one another (or to the city at large in terms of the fire hall or the through block route from Yorkville to Scollard). Yes, it's a motor court, in a sense, not the courtyard and garden of the Palazzo Medici in Florence, but one could imagine that if Clewes and Cormier had truly collaborated instead of working in isolation, and had been instructed by their client to look to the historic vocabulary of Yorkville (Lothian Mews?) we would not have gotten such a disjointed, disappointing result.
Click to expand...

I do agree that they should have embraced their Yorkville context more with respect to the other bunker-like facades but as for the courtyard I think you've hit the nail on the head already in your post: this is still fundamentally and functionally a modern-age motor court designed to handle the high traffic flow of cars and guests coming and going. Some may not like the formal design choices but they did at least offer some engaging design features and open the space up to the street for the appreciation of all rather than hiding it behind some concrete porte-cochere like many other hotels of this scale do, i.e. look at what a dead zone is created in a similar context behind the Park Hyatt at Bloor and Avenue Road.

junctionist said:
If they wanted a flower bed then they should have built just a flower bed--not what's clearly some sort of public space with walking paths. It's a waste of space.
Click to expand...

In a way it is in fact a 'flower' bed, or a parterre to be more accurate. It blends some traditional classical elements with modern minimalist ones. I understand it's not to everyone's taste in its high formality, especially in a very casual Toronto where something simply being pretty is considered a waste of space. Paris is full of wasted spaces like this though and I'm grateful for it.

Torontovibe said:
Any building that takes but gives nothing back is a huge fail. That is not the way to build great cities.
Click to expand...

This space was designed to be on view (and it needn't have been), I'm not sure how it doesn't 'give' to the public realm? Again, they could have gone with a blind parking entrance/porte cochere.

Torontovibe said:
This space could have been so much better if they put that waterless fountain in the middle of the rose garden, turned on the water and surrounded it with beautiful benches. Don't wealthy people enjoy sitting in beautiful parks too? I'm sure their guests would have gotten much more use out of that dead space.
Click to expand...

I do agree that the fountain was handled clumsily and that it is a 'fail' that it doesn't work. A fountain in the middle of the parterre would have been lovely. I am not affiliated with this hotel/project in any way, by the way, but i can only imagine that the hotel didn't specifically want guests lingering in this relatively small space (for whatever reasons). The paths/design elements allow a closer look but essentially lead people through and onwards, which is likely the intent.


Torontovibe said:
Whenever I have gone there, the area seems so deserted, so in my opinion it's a dead zone and does nothing to animate that area. In fact, this whole building has created a lifeless area. It's not a pleasant place to walk. It just goes to show you how a building can look good in renderings but if it fails at street level, it destroys any animation on the street and fails at enlarging the retail footprint of Yorkville. This building was supposed to enliven Bay Street and help enlarge the retail strip north but it completely fails in that regard.
Click to expand...

I agree that the Bay Street facade is a wasted opportunity. I do appreciate, however, that they created this gratuitously function-less garden in an otherwise highly functioning space. Yorkville isn't just a retail experience. A number of interesting gardens/parks have been developed over the years that add non-commercial interest to an area that was at risk of losing an identity that wasn't tied to consumerism. I do hope other developers take up this challenge so that strolling through the area can be enjoyed without spending money, taking us not just past shops and restaurants but through gardens, parks and along beautiful landscaped streets.

I do understand that this stretch of Yorkville Avenue feels lifeless but the adjacent surroundings are far more to blame for this than the garden, i.e. the south side of Yorkville Avenue in particular. An improvement here will improve the context of the garden/court vastly!
 
Tewder said:
I do agree that they should have embraced their Yorkville context more with respect to the other bunker-like facades but as for the courtyard I think you've hit the nail on the head already in your post: this is still fundamentally and functionally a modern-age motor court designed to handle the high traffic flow of cars and guests coming and going. Some may not like the formal design choices but they did at least offer some engaging design features and open the space up to the street for the appreciation of all rather than hiding it behind some concrete porte-cochere like many other hotels of this scale do, i.e. look at what a dead zone is created in a similar context behind the Park Hyatt at Bloor and Avenue Road.



In a way it is in fact a 'flower' bed, or a parterre to be more accurate. It blends some traditional classical elements with modern minimalist ones. I understand it's not to everyone's taste in its high formality, especially in a very casual Toronto where something simply being pretty is considered a waste of space. Paris is full of wasted spaces like this though and I'm grateful for it.



This space was designed to be on view (and it needn't have been), I'm not sure how it doesn't 'give' to the public realm? Again, they could have gone with a blind parking entrance/porte cochere.



I do agree that the fountain was handled clumsily and that it is a 'fail' that it doesn't work. A fountain in the middle of the parterre would have been lovely. I am not affiliated with this hotel/project in any way, by the way, but i can only imagine that the hotel didn't specifically want guests lingering in this relatively small space (for whatever reasons). The paths/design elements allow a closer look but essentially lead people through and onwards, which is likely the intent.




I agree that the Bay Street facade is a wasted opportunity. I do appreciate, however, that they created this gratuitously function-less garden in an otherwise highly functioning space. Yorkville isn't just a retail experience. A number of interesting gardens/parks have been developed over the years that add non-commercial interest to an area that was at risk of losing an identity that wasn't tied to consumerism. I do hope other developers take up this challenge so that strolling through the area can be enjoyed without spending money, taking us not just past shops and restaurants but through gardens, parks and along beautiful landscaped streets.

I do understand that this stretch of Yorkville Avenue feels lifeless but the adjacent surroundings are far more to blame for this than the garden, i.e. the south side of Yorkville Avenue in particular. An improvement here will improve the context of the garden/court vastly!
Click to expand...

Good comments, Tewder. What we have ended up with is a dead block on Bay, (where the true "front" door on axis with the reception desk feels like a back door) and a drop-off motor court/"garden", where guests enter and need a guide to direct them through the labyrinth of a ground floor to get anywhere.

Perhaps the solution should have been similar to other urban grand hotels in New York and Europe, namely to allow vehicular drop-off on Bay, with a small army of valets on call (there are only 259 rooms after all). The entry would have then become a real entry and the energy and buzz on Bay from the comings and goings would have been great (with the potential of retail actually surviving north of Yorkville). Then imagine the entire space to the rear on Yorkville made up of a large garden terrace for the restaurant, like in Paris or Istanbul, with a real water feature, and a landscaped through block connection to Scollard, plus a public park against the fire hall (and before anyone jumps on the "wind" bandwagon, there could have been a bump out at the base or the tower to the east that would have deflected the wind off the ground plane).

Of course, the traffic engineers never would have supported this fantasy. For me, I would have given up sidewalk space on Bay for vehicular drop off if it meant having a lush, animated terrace/garden/park on Yorkville.
 
thecharioteer said:
Of course, the traffic engineers never would have supported this fantasy. For me, I would have given up sidewalk space on Bay for vehicular drop off if it meant having a lush, animated terrace/garden/park on Yorkville.
Click to expand...


I like the way you think. You're right though, it's unlikely the city would have gone for such a plan. I can't recall how wide Bay is at this location (only two lanes in each direction?) but vehicular check-in/valet service would only snarl traffic here worse than it already is. In NYC, even many side streets are wider than this (in midtown at least where most of the big hotels are).
 
November 1 2014


attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • 2014-11-01 10.18.54.jpg
    2014-11-01 10.18.54.jpg
    657.1 KB · Views: 1,354
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top