Hotel X (was Hotel in the Garden) | ?m | 27s | Exhibition Place | NORR

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
25,901
Reaction score
30,141
Location
by the Humber
The renderings have been pretty much slammed for it looking like a bloated Simpsons Tower. They are a couple of pages back in this thread, but of course you can always find them in the dataBase.

42
 

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
9,104
Reaction score
3,039
Location
The Junction, Toronto
I don't understand why the standards for historic building preservation were so low after World War II that clearly historic buildings which had already reached that significant 100 year mark like the New Fort complex were fair game for demolition and replacement with parking lots. This complex originally had 7 limestone buildings around a parade square. Nevertheless, the contemporary plan to preserve and display the foundations, achieve a high standard of landscape design, and to denote the former Lake Ontario shoreline with a water feature sounds excellent in creating a landscape that has a historic atmosphere and encourages people to take an interest in our history. It's about time that the site gets the attention it deserves as it's neglected yet seen by hundreds of thousands of people every year at events like the CNE. I'd like to see a similar approach at the First Parliament site, though with a smaller contemporary building.

The landscaping incorporating and displaying the archeological remains is what's positive about this project. But to have this architecturally busy tower possibly ruining views of the Princes' Gates from the east is unacceptable. It looks like it will also loom over the waterfront, but it doesn't have the kind of iconic design to be able to stand alone. The city should at least have the interior volume redistributed. Looming over the Princes' Gates and the waterfront should be avoided. Also, in a city where heritage is often compromised without reflection as to whether such compromises are truly necessary, I wonder if all of the significant foundations are to be preserved, or just some, leaving people with an incomplete picture.
 

Sir Novelty Fashion

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
1,523
Reaction score
18
Yeesh, what a mess. What's more, think of the poor souls who book there in February, under the impression that they're going to land in the vibrant heart of the city. If nothing else, at least Billy Bishop is close enough to make a quick getaway...
 

Tuscani01

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
5,497
Reaction score
2,234
The landscaping incorporating and displaying the archeological remains is what's positive about this project. But to have this architecturally busy tower possibly ruining views of the Princes' Gates from the east is unacceptable. It looks like it will also loom over the waterfront, but it doesn't have the kind of iconic design to be able to stand alone. The city should at least have the interior volume redistributed. Looming over the Princes' Gates and the waterfront should be avoided. Also, in a city where heritage is often compromised without reflection as to whether such compromises are truly necessary, I wonder if all of the significant foundations are to be preserved, or just some, leaving people with an incomplete picture.

Completely agree. For a standalone tower, the design should have been way better than what we are getting. The first building that comes to mind when thinking of this site, and what should be built is this tower that was proposed for a Marina in Cascais in Portugal. It blends in with the sky, has a simple, but amazing design, and it looks great on its own.

images


1800_cascais-marina-tower.jpg
 
Last edited:

MatthewK

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 28, 2009
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
The Landscaping looks very good I think. But the tower and the complex attached to it, both of which look very confused without being striking, is yet another wasted opportunity.

Really, it's a disaster.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

AllThingsUrban

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 16, 2008
Messages
18
Reaction score
0
Location
NYC
Hotel X and Future Integrated Casino Hotel

Anyone want to predict how the Hotel X project will evolve over the next few months if the MGM Casino, or any other Casino hotel group's, integrated resort is approved and selected?
 
Last edited by a moderator:

androiduk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
6,966
Reaction score
1,828
Location
Yonge & Bloor
Hallelujah!!!


Application: Partial Permit Status: Not Started

Location: 2 STRACHAN AVE
TORONTO ON M6K 3C3

Ward 19: Trinity-Spadina

Application#: 13 122221 SHO 00 PP Accepted Date: Feb 27, 2013

Project: Motel/Hotel Partial Permit - Shoring

Description: Part Permit - Proposal to construct a new 28 sty hotel and 2 levels of below grade parking. "Hotel X at Exhibition Place". New convenience address - 111 Princes Blvd.
 

SP!RE

°°°°°°
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
3,954
Reaction score
8
Location
Southcore
When I saw "Hallelujah" I was thinking maybe the city rejected the proposal. Wishful thinking I guess...
 

androiduk

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 3, 2008
Messages
6,966
Reaction score
1,828
Location
Yonge & Bloor
My 'Hallelujah' is for seeing the underutilized Exhibition grounds get some development that will add life to the area year round. Hopefully next is the casino/entertainment complex and maybe a monorail connecting Billy Bishop Airport to Ontario Place.
 

Top