Toronto KING Toronto | 57.6m | 16s | Westbank | Bjarke Ingels Group

Marcanadian said:
New documents have been submitted in support of the Site Plan application. Some of the adjustments from the October 2017 rezoning submission are spelled out below (this was all approved in principle at LPAT in August):
  • Revised massing to lower the two south peaks, middle south peak and north peak.
  • Southern facing valleys lowered.
  • South arch entrance to the courtyard widened at grade.
  • Increases in building setbacks/stepbacks led to reduction in residential and commercial GFA.
  • Minimum setbacks from south property line increased, increased setback from east facade of 489 King.
View attachment 159512 View attachment 159513 View attachment 159514 View attachment 159515 View attachment 159516 View attachment 159517

Database has also been updated with the above renderings.
Click to expand...
Looks like a pretty run of the mill, Toronto development project.
 
I wonder if BIG's design here has gone through the winter design guidelines at some point in the design process.

I know they are Danish and ostensibly used to winter weather, but that hasn't stopped fellow compatriots Snohetta from overlooking Toronto winter conditions at the SLC in the past.

I'm asking, because I don't see any winter weather renderings.
 
I have a question ... tree really on the roof? if windy like 70-100 km and will kill and make damaged tree? I like this design but tree on the roof look stupid idea to me
 
I wouldn't think so, the building isn't that tall. It would be the same as a tree being on top of a large hill.

There are likely other factors that would affect the growth and health of the trees. I won't pretend to know what they are.
 
heatscore said:
I wouldn't think so, the building isn't that tall. It would be the same as a tree being on top of a large hill.

There are likely other factors that would affect the growth and health of the trees. I won't pretend to know what they are.
Click to expand...

okay, I was in Sault Ste. Marie in 2 week ago and there is no tall towers in this town and all trees on the grounds and windys did wiped out more than 200 trees and some of them was small thin trees, what is my point? trees on the roof is bad idea for Canada weather and this is not California, oh geez!
 
Deaf_Torontian said:
okay, I was in Sault Ste. Marie in 2 week ago and there is no tall towers in this town and all trees on the grounds and windys did wiped out more than 200 trees and some of them was small thin trees, what is my point? trees on the roof is bad idea for Canada weather and this is not California, oh geez!
Click to expand...
Yup it's not California weather where at least they won't burn up,
..you may think it's a bad idea but it has been done in Toronto and many cities with similar climate to ours
 
From the above article:
“Despite sustained efforts on the part of city planners to impose a conventional, unsightly and uninspiring vision for this very special site, Allied and Westbank stood firmly behind the original vision and ultimately prevailed,” said Allied president and chief executive officer Michael Emory.
Click to expand...

Ouch!
 
Ramako said:
From the above article:


Ouch!
Click to expand...
Yes, that immediately stood out to me as a bizarre sentiment. Why would they intentionally and persistently try to thwart such an imaginative proposal in favour of banality? What kind of a message does that send to developers: don’t bother bringing your A game; we prefer duds? One would think that city planners would want to lionize the developers and architect for putting forth such an exceptional plan for this site. Thankfully Allied and Westbank are well-principled people that actually care about making the cities they work in more beautiful and fascinating — however small that impact might be — as opposed to being merely concerned with profits (like most developers in Toronto are). Without the few developers working in Toronto, who aren’t willing to acquiesce to the desires of city planners, what hope is there for the city, in this regard? It’s as if Allied, Westbank and BIG are saying to the City: here, we’re presenting you with this classy tuxedo and the City is saying, ‘can you just give us sweatpants and a windbreaker, instead?’

Note to Bjarke Ingels and Ian Gillespie: If this project turns out as beautifully as the renderings and model suggest, we should have dinner, shortly after its completion. I know this little out of the way place that serves great Viking food; your treat?
 
Last edited:
City Planers were probably pushing them to build a 50s glass box instead. :p

Units will be available to VIPs in the next day or so. I'm looking forward to seeing the pricing and the floorplans.
 
The Rover said:
Yes, that immediately stood out to me as a bizarre sentiment. Why would they intentionally and persistently try to thwart such an imaginative proposal in favour of banality? What kind of a message does that send to developers: don’t bother bringing your A game; we prefer duds? One would think that city planners would want to lionize the developers and architect for putting forth such an exceptional plan for this site. Thankfully Allied and Westbank are well-principled people that actually care about making the cities they work in more beautiful and fascinating — however small that impact might be — as opposed to being merely concerned with profits (like most developers in Toronto are). Without the few developers working in Toronto, who aren’t willing to acquiesce to the desires of city planners, what hope is there for the city, in this regard? It’s as if Allied, Westbank and BIG are saying to the City: here, we’re presenting you with this classy tuxedo and the City is saying, ‘can you just give us sweatpants and a windbreaker, instead?’

Note to Bjarke Ingels and Ian Gillespie: If this project turns out as beautifully as the renderings and model suggest, we should have dinner, shortly after its completion. I know this little out of the way place that serves great Viking food; your treat?
Click to expand...

I'm not at all surprised.
 
The Rover said:
Yes, that immediately stood out to me as a bizarre sentiment. Why would they intentionally and persistently try to thwart such an imaginative proposal in favour of banality? What kind of a message does that send to developers: don’t bother bringing your A game; we prefer duds? One would think that city planners would want to lionize the developers and architect for putting forth such an exceptional plan for this site. Thankfully Allied and Westbank are well-principled people that actually care about making the cities they work in more beautiful and fascinating — however small that impact might be — as opposed to being merely concerned with profits (like most developers in Toronto are). Without the few developers working in Toronto, who aren’t willing to acquiesce to the desires of city planners, what hope is there for the city, in this regard? It’s as if Allied, Westbank and BIG are saying to the City: here, we’re presenting you with this classy tuxedo and the City is saying, ‘can you just give us sweatpants and a windbreaker, instead?’

Note to Bjarke Ingels and Ian Gillespie: If this project turns out as beautifully as the renderings and model suggest, we should have dinner, shortly after its completion. I know this little out of the way place that serves great Viking food; your treat?
Click to expand...

Because this project did - and still does - have issues. Specifically access to sunlight. I certianly get giving some leeway for creativity - but the tower and podium formula is so popular for a reason, and that is that it works. It creates density with about as few impacts on the environment as possible.

This project when first proposed was essentially a gigantic 16 storey hulk that would loom over the entire district. It killed a lot of mid block connections this stretch of King is famous for, and presented an unrelenting street facade along a significant portion of King west, again, an area known for the exact opposite with its various warehouse buildings and lanes bringing people deeper into the blocks. From an architectural perspective it was incredible from day 1 - but from an urban design perspective, not so much.

The development has since rectified a lot of these issues - but if you ask me is still going to end up being over-scaled and monolithic in nature. I'd love to be wrong though.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top