Toronto One Bedford | ?m | 32s | Lanterra | KPMB

That courtyard on Bedford seemed really awkward when they first started forming the podium, but now that the tower is filling in behind it it actually looks like it has some potential. I don't think we ever got to see a siteplan for the development, but now I'd really like to see some retail/restaurant space facing inwards to the courtyard with lots of room for patios. It would be a nice place to sit and have a meal, away from the traffic on Bloor
 
interchange42 said:
You know, the InterContinental seemed pretty big when it went in all those years ago, and with 1 Bedford only fractionally finished, it already looks diminished to the point of being a rather small boutique hotel. Once 1 Bedford is finished, the InterCon will likely be begging to be reclad, or even demolished and replaced with something more impressive.

42
Click to expand...

The InterContinental looks like one of the TCHC buildings on The Esplanade. It certainly doesn't look like an upscale hotel. I think the sooner it's gone, the better. Who would pay top dollar to stay in that cheap looking thing?
 
Replacing buildings at such a fast rate would not only be unsustainable, but completely cost ineffective.

Re: One Bedford, the glass is definitely a change. I rarely believe developers do these things last-minute, but I think that glass was a recent decision. With glass going up so late into construction, and the way the economy has been, something doesn't seem right. The Cheapening, indeed.

I still love the design and site plan though, so I am excited to watch it continue going up!
 
I can't see the intercontinental being demolished any time soon, the hotel spent millions renovating the interiors about 2 years ago, best they will do is reclad the exterior. The hotel is one of the few luxury boutique hotels in the city the hotel doesn't need to be any larger.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Torontovibe said:
The InterContinental looks like one of the TCHC buildings on The Esplanade. It certainly doesn't look like an upscale hotel. I think the sooner it's gone, the better. Who would pay top dollar to stay in that cheap looking thing?
Click to expand...

If people only stayed at hotels based on what the exterior looked like, The Sheraton, Hilton, Four Seasons, would all be out of business by now.
 
Actually the inside of the InterContinental is pretty amazing. But the outside is definitely lacklustre and could certainly do with some jazzing up. Hopefully a completed One Bedford, along with its spiffy neighbours along that stretch of Bloor, will help convince the owners to do it.
 
Honestly, I don't even find the IC exterior fatally lacklustre and/or in need of a drastic makeover. Quite simply, it's the perfect orange-brick postmodern-contextualist Toronto hotel of the 80s, and its relative lack of glitz is IMO more of a relief than a demerit.

Lay off the "jazzing up" recommendations; you might wind up with worse than you bargained on (cf. the extreme makeovers of Dickinson's Westbury and Park Plaza addition).
 
adma said:
Lay off the "jazzing up" recommendations; you might wind up with worse than you bargained on (cf. the extreme makeovers of Dickinson's Westbury and Park Plaza addition).
Click to expand...

Actually I'll recommend whatever I want, pal. In case you hadn't noticed, that's what this thread's for. If you happen to like the IC exterior, then that's your opinion and you're entitled to express it.

Me, I stand by my opinion and my recommendation. If you don't like it, tough.
 
1 bedford has helped complete the interior courtyard at the Intercontinental. The Skylounge at Intercontinental now feels complete on all sides as 1 bedford has perfectly closed in the courtyard. A nice urban little setting.
 
Sept. 6th

Moving along well

Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.

 
Northern Magus said:
Actually I'll recommend whatever I want, pal. In case you hadn't noticed, that's what this thread's for. If you happen to like the IC exterior, then that's your opinion and you're entitled to express it.

Me, I stand by my opinion and my recommendation. If you don't like it, tough.
Click to expand...

Paradoxically given the stylistic differences, my case on behalf of the Intercontinental isn't altogether unlike Urban Shocker's case for Corus--perhaps it even compliments it. And it probably also compliments US's laments over how today's restlessly overyuppified storefronts on Yonge in North Toronto can make one long for the days of relative urban decorum 40 odd years ago.

Sometimes, it's better to take a deep breath and leave well enough alone. The Intercontinental is a good, civil chunk of c1990 postmodern urbanism that neither harms nor degrades the cityscape. Maybe its un-glitz is unfashionable within the c2010 Bloor context; but that doesn't render it either wretched, out of place, or arbitrarily disposable. At worst, it's "of its time"--and heck, it's more complimentary of the KPMB architectural lineage (extending back to Diamond/Myers in the 70s, natch) than not...
 
SP!RE said:
Replacing the Intercontinental just to build something more "impressive" doesn't really make sense to me.

As for One Bedford-- what happened to the glass?! I was sure from photos and the short glance I had, that the windows were a dark brown bronze/aged copper colour.... ahhhh what happened. I don't mind the glass but so far it doesn't go well with the stone and precast on this thing. It's not at all what I would have put with this building. Even grey or dark tinted glass would have been nicer. Yikes! We'll see how this works out.
Click to expand...

Did you mean that they have now put in glass that is a bronze/copper colour? I couldn't see any glass installed on any of the photos on the thread...
 
adma said:
Paradoxically given the stylistic differences, my case on behalf of the Intercontinental isn't altogether unlike Urban Shocker's case for Corus--perhaps it even compliments it. And it probably also compliments US's laments over how today's restlessly overyuppified storefronts on Yonge in North Toronto can make one long for the days of relative urban decorum 40 odd years ago.

Sometimes, it's better to take a deep breath and leave well enough alone. The Intercontinental is a good, civil chunk of c1990 postmodern urbanism that neither harms nor degrades the cityscape. Maybe its un-glitz is unfashionable within the c2010 Bloor context; but that doesn't render it either wretched, out of place, or arbitrarily disposable. At worst, it's "of its time"--and heck, it's more complimentary of the KPMB architectural lineage (extending back to Diamond/Myers in the 70s, natch) than not...
Click to expand...

Fair points, thoughtfully considered, and decently argued.

The case against your position principally rests on capitalism and commercial practices, underscored by aesthetic considerations. In an ever-competitive neighbourhood of four and five star hotels, it is arguably incumbent on any hotelier wishing to maintain and increase its marketshare to take whatever reasonable steps it can to gain or preserve any competitive advantages. Maximizing the guest's impression of a luxury experience must necessarily extend beyond the hotel's interior and onto its facade as well.

While its understated exterior may have indeed served it well in the past, I would contend that it is not in this hotel's commercial interests to risk diminishing its brand position by appearing like too modest a cousin of the new luxury arrivals. And it might also help bring even more class to that stretch of Bloor.
 
Northern Magus said:
Fair points, thoughtfully considered, and decently argued.

The case against your position principally rests on capitalism and commercial practices, underscored by aesthetic considerations. In an ever-competitive neighbourhood of four and five star hotels, it is arguably incumbent on any hotelier wishing to maintain and increase its marketshare to take whatever reasonable steps it can to gain or preserve any competitive advantages. Maximizing the guest's impression of a luxury experience must necessarily extend beyond the hotel's interior and onto its facade as well.

While its understated exterior may have indeed served it well in the past, I would contend that it is not in this hotel's commercial interests to risk diminishing its brand position by appearing like too modest a cousin of the new luxury arrivals. And it might also help bring even more class to that stretch of Bloor.
Click to expand...

You know, back in the 90s, you might as well have been talking about this building on the same block.

parkplazase.jpg


ppcanopye.jpg


And if you think what happened to it is a good thing that brought "more class"; well, maybe it's better that jerks like you be stopped in your tracks.
 
For a supposed luxury building, the cladding and windows look quite ordinary, if not sub-par.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top