Toronto IMMIX | 131.06m | 38s | QuadReal | a—A

AlvinofDiaspar said:
Agreed, the materials are better than expected, but the perspective rendering is quite unrealistic - trying to draw the attention away from the tower and lengthen the Yonge facade, which is probably a lot narrower than portrayed. Realism please.

AoD
Click to expand...

I agree, I walk past that twice a day and the rendering makes that stretch of Yonge look a lot longer than it really is. That said, the renderings look interesting. I'm not sure about the base of the clock tower though, I'm not sure I love that.
 
The clock tower is straight up ugly. I wouldn't miss it and it looks even sillier when everything around it has been demolished and replaced by a modern building.
 
P23 said:
The clock tower is straight up ugly. I wouldn't miss it and it looks even sillier when everything around it has been demolished and replaced by a modern building.
Click to expand...

but it is supposed to pass as "history" or "heritage", for which Toronto seems to have an extraordinarily low bar.
 
Rendering looks good. The clocktower is so ridiculously stupid I don't even know what to say. But it's Toronto. They'd preserve a piece of chewing gum if they could....I keed, I keed.
 
Love the rusted-looking steel. Amazing. The patio is appreciated. So many ppl complain about podiums not meeting the street correctly while they like the tower portions. This one meets the street correctly, so why care if we can't see the tower portion in the renderings? It seems contradictory.
 
Last edited:
NBGtect said:
So many ppl complain about podiums not meeting the street correctly while they like the tower portions. This one meets the street correctly, so why care if we can't see the tower portion in the renderings? It seems contradictory.
Click to expand...

If one can't depend on the materials to communicate the correct length of the facade, height of the podium and the setback of the tower from the street itself (which is exaggerated in the rendering), one is in no position to come to the conclusion it "meets the street correctly".

AoD
 
Last edited:
This looks very promising. I love the weathered steel. To the naysayers I say the clock tower isn't going anywhere. Heritage isn't just about aesthetics. It's also about historical significance. This is an important landmark in the community for many reasons, as explained in the feature article here.
 
Overall I think it's a great improvement to that stretch of Yonge street. Probably needs some tweaking but the proposed recess to create a small pedestrian area is a great idea. I'm happy the clock tower is not only getting restored but is also being used as a focal point. We have a few old fire halls in Toronto, notably the one on Yorkville Ave and the one on Bellvue Ave south of College Street. Reminds me of the old fire halls in NYC and Boston. I like this proposal very much.
 
P23 said:
The clock tower is straight up ugly. I wouldn't miss it and it looks even sillier when everything around it has been demolished and replaced by a modern building.
Click to expand...

ksun said:
but it is supposed to pass as "history" or "heritage", for which Toronto seems to have an extraordinarily low bar.
Click to expand...

TheKingEast said:
...The clocktower is so ridiculously stupid I don't even know what to say. But it's Toronto....
Click to expand...

I know those are just subjective opinions and I won't ask for specific reasons you think it's ugly, but put me in the camp that thinks it looks good. I guess I'm one of those history freaks that prefers soon to be 150 year old clock towers to a new bank or coffee shop. This pathology probably stems from an early childhood brain trauma I am not aware of.

Carry on.
 
I think it's good. They actually gave thought to this. They cared about the historic content and are attempting to do something tasteful with a relic which is in itself not that tasteful. The weathered metal will be charming and welcomed by me. I also think its nice to give a little space around the clock tower so people can "meet under it"
Looks like an improvement to me.
 
ksun said:
but it is supposed to pass as "history" or "heritage", for which Toronto seems to have an extraordinarily low bar.
Click to expand...

Well, if that's the case, so does any town that's not an Asian-style boomburg.
 
Uptowner said:
I know those are just subjective opinions and I won't ask for specific reasons you think it's ugly, but put me in the camp that thinks it looks good. I guess I'm one of those history freaks that prefers soon to be 150 year old clock towers to a new bank or coffee shop. This pathology probably stems from an early childhood brain trauma I am not aware of.

Carry on.
Click to expand...

Most excellent response.

Put me in the "I like the clock tower too" camp. Makes the city more interesting when there's a real mix of periods and styles. Too much dreary blue and grey glass as it is.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
If one can't depend on the materials to communicate the correct length of the facade, height of the podium and the setback of the tower from the street itself (which is exaggerated in the rendering), one is in no position to come to the conclusion it "meets the street correctly".

AoD
Click to expand...

You may not be able to see it but some of us 'get' how it meets the street correctly. This is top shelf stuff. Put me in the "I love the clock tower" camp too. And yes, this project would not be proposed in an Asian ghost city.
 
I'm glad the clock tower is being used in this development. It does however look a little awkward as shown. I bet the design team agonized over how to keep the tower and keep it in context with the new tower. The tower and that location has a lot of history especially with the gay community. I don't knowm whether that history will be recognized.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top