Toronto Pan Am Village in the West Don Lands | ?m | ?s | DundeeKilmer | KPMB

I had such high hopes for this neighbourhood, but it's a sad, sad, place. It's like they looked to British public housing projects of the 20th Century for inspiration. I'm so glad I didn't buy here.
 
Last edited:
interchange42 said:
This batch focuses in on the George Brown College building by architectsAlliance, and the TCHC buildings by Daoust Lestage of Montreal.


These shots (and the other recent inside-the-fence shots of recent posts including those in the Canary Park and Canary District threads) were taken when we sat down with Ken Tanenbaum of the Kilmer Group, half of the DundeeKilmer development team building the Pan Am Village. We have the interview up on the front page.

42
Click to expand...

Why didn't you ask him why the whole district had to be grey? Isn't that the most talked about issue on this site? Would have that been considered rude or too hard hitting of a question? Don't we have a right to question something that seems so obvious to just about everyone? I seriously want to know what is the method to this madness and more importantly, will this all grey spandrel dreariness continue. Will this be an all grey district when finished? Sure, it will depress the hell out of me but I think it's better to know what's coming so I won't get my hopes up.

I can't believe you didn't ask that question.

I called Waterfront Toronto to ask that same question and I was told someone would call me back. She did but had no idea why it turned out the way it did. She told me the person responsible for it, would call me back. It's been about 2 weeks now and no phone call. It seems Pam McConnell's office has no idea either.

It's amazing to me that things like this happen but nobody can give me an explanation WHY! I will be a thorn in Pam McConnel's side, until I see a change in the direction of the Pan-Am Village. I am NOT a happy camper!
 
Last edited:
While I think many in this forum including myself would join in the lament of a lack of colour variation, there still exists future development blocks yet to be built which we can still hope to see some colour infusion from.

If you do get a response from WT or the Cllrs office kinda let us know would you? :)
 
Torontovibe: I did not ask as I was not the person conducting the interview, but if I had been…

That's not the time to ask. You either need to have all the players in the room—developers and architects—so you can lob the question out there and give whoever's going to take responsibility the chance to explain their thinking,

or

You send the question out earlier and have the two main developers sort out with the two main architects who should get back to us on that.

There's no advantage to be had from an ambush. In this area of town more than any other, it's a serious question to be asked in a serious way. We are considering how we best want to approach this. Do we want to start by talking to Urban Design at the City to ask if the Design Review Panel has expressed concern yet or if there are rumblings? Do we want to approach architects in general who have been using gray brick (and even more so gray spandrel) and ask them about its use in both general ways and on specific projects? Is it always a design decision, or is price involved? If so, will they deflect to the developers? Will we only get answers from some architects if they're speaking anonymously?

We want thoughtful answers, whether the gray is defended or not. No ambushes.

42
 
Took a walk through the park and the outside of the Pan Am game village; The 'grey concerns', let me call them that, shared by many are absolutely valid. I think a perfect example of an area where colour played a vibrant role is the Vancouver athletes Village: Interchange42 if a conversation is to be had I'd use this as an example, and genuinely ask the architectures / planners involved with Toronto's variants for their thoughts. Granted I know a lot more money was involved in the Vancouver village (and there was a lot of controversy surrounding that).

With all that said, I think time will be on the side of this development, the renderings used to depict how this area will look, should have had caption clearly stating this is the 'long term a.k.a 10/20/30 years out look and feel'. There are so many 'blank spaces', namely parcels of land left to develop here there is a good change that things will change a lot, and for the better.

I do think this area will feel very very empty for the first few 5-10 years, the exception being the private portion closer to King (i.e. river city / TCHC), which will really fill out the area to the north.
 
I don't think this area will feel "very empty" for the first 5 to 10 years. People will be moving in two years from now, with all of the current buildings supposed to be fully occupied by September 2016. Shops will be open, and you'll see a lot more green then too. George Brown Students will be in, and the YMCA will be hopping. Front Street through to Corktown Common will probably be a popular place for people. There'll still be too much gray, but I have no doubt the area will be a happening place.

42
 
FNTS said:
I had such high hopes for this neighbourhood, but it's a sad, sad, place. It's like they looked to British public housing projects of the 20th Century for inspiration. I'm so glad I didn't buy here.
Click to expand...

Hahahaha... that's AWESOME! Great, great troll.

WDL is going to be an amazing neighbourhood, the park is already a ton o' fun, the connection to the Don bikepath really helps, RiverCity and GBC/YMCA don't look at ALL alike, much less Canary, and, and, and... what other kvetching have I missed? Watching this come together (and the rest of WaterfrontToronto's projects where the city couldn't meddle too much) has been an impressive experience.

When they get the sweep of dogpark/prairie done from the King/Queen triangle to the park and the trees on the woonerfs done, this will be one of the greenest and most livable places in all of Toronto.

Bring your kids for a splash, your dog for a walk, or your partner for a picnic at Corktown Commons and enjoy one of the best pieces of 'new construction Toronto' before the Pan Am craziness. Y'all be glad you did.
 
Let me first say that as someone who lives in Toronto and has a vested interest in the success and vitality of this city (and cities in general), I'm very grateful that this site exists, along with all its administrators, moderators, contributors, and general members. You keep us all connected and engaged with our home in a way that simply wouldn't be possible without you. With such a meagre post count to my credit, I'll do my best to repay the favour.

But it would be foolish to assume that the people who run this site -- the people who own and are employed by this company -- don't have a vested interest in creating and maintaining amicable relationships with the architects and developers who work here. Without such relationships, we wouldn't have behind-the-scenes tours, jaw-dropping photos from atop sky-high construction sites, or very many exclusive interviews at all, really. As a professional communicator who knows his way around stakeholder and media relations, I know that 42's explanations for those softly lobbed, easily answered questions make perfect sense. Why ask about anything contentious, if only to alienate them and threaten your relationship?

So there's that. And there's also the flagrant truth that their goodwill is needed to make this site viable. Promotional opportunities abound for them; just scroll around and take a look at the ads on the page, or take a trip to the project database, unfaltering in its enthusiasm, for some reminders. Plus they get the opportunity to profile their work in self-aggrandizing interviews every now and then.

Hard-hitting journalism it ain't, folks. But at least the common folk are still afforded the liberty of speaking freely.

interchange42 said:
Torontovibe: I did not ask as I was not the person conducting the interview, but if I had been…

That's not the time to ask. You either need to have all the players in the room—developers and architects—so you can lob the question out there and give whoever's going to take responsibility the chance to explain their thinking,

or

You send the question out earlier and have the two main developers sort out with the two main architects who should get back to us on that.

There's no advantage to be had from an ambush. In this area of town more than any other, it's a serious question to be asked in a serious way. We are considering how we best want to approach this. Do we want to start by talking to Urban Design at the City to ask if the Design Review Panel has expressed concern yet or if there are rumblings? Do we want to approach architects in general who have been using gray brick (and even more so gray spandrel) and ask them about its use in both general ways and on specific projects? Is it always a design decision, or is price involved? If so, will they deflect to the developers? Will we only get answers from some architects if they're speaking anonymously?

We want thoughtful answers, whether the gray is defended or not. No ambushes.

42
Click to expand...
 
forever29 said:
Let me first say that as someone who lives in Toronto and has a vested interest in the success and vitality of this city (and cities in general), I'm very grateful that this site exists, along with all its administrators, moderators, contributors, and general members. You keep us all connected and engaged with our home in a way that simply wouldn't be possible without you. With such a meagre post count to my credit, I'll do my best to repay the favour.

But it would be foolish to assume that the people who run this site -- the people who own and are employed by this company -- don't have a vested interest in creating and maintaining amicable relationships with the architects and developers who work here. Without such relationships, we wouldn't have behind-the-scenes tours, jaw-dropping photos from atop sky-high construction sites, or very many exclusive interviews at all, really. As a professional communicator who knows his way around stakeholder and media relations, I know that 42's explanations for those softly lobbed, easily answered questions make perfect sense. Why ask about anything contentious, if only to alienate them and threaten your relationship?

So there's that. And there's also the flagrant truth that their goodwill is needed to make this site viable. Promotional opportunities abound for them; just scroll around and take a look at the ads on the page, or take a trip to the project database, unfaltering in its enthusiasm, for some reminders. Plus they get the opportunity to profile their work in self-aggrandizing interviews every now and then.

Hard-hitting journalism it ain't, folks. But at least the common folk are still afforded the liberty of speaking freely.
Click to expand...


A little much I'll argue ... though it is easy to see why you'd reach such conclusions ... Maintaining relationships is important, and keeping this site an economically self sufficient venture just as much ...

IT42's reply was not in any way condoning the 'grey' rather, simply stating that having such a conversation needs to be done in the correct manner (and the communication medium it self to have this is just as important). It is so easy for us to sit down at our computers and type "this area is full of grey and that sucks" ... it'd be just as easy for the moderators to simply agree and move on, you consider that hard hitting journalism ? Rather I think the reply above, clearing stating a plan to start this conversation and ask questions the type of attitude that can bring about change in the long term ... and I'm still hopeful this site can accomplish that (as had been hinted in a couple other projects / situations).
 
Over the years this site has definitely morphed from its original format of enthusiasts waxing about their favoured issue into a more commercialized space. That has brought benefits (as enumerated above) and some pitfalls, namely that criticism by the officiators of the site are susceptible to being muffled, and many projects are perhaps undeservingly praised - though as taal points out, sometimes muffled criticism can actually be more useful to a desired outcome. However, UrbanToronto still provides a space where average Torontonians (and others interested) can state their opinions, which sometimes actually do reach the developers who are sharing this space with us. The Massey Tower project comes to mind where this site (or rather the people involved in it) was actually vital to a great outcome. For those concerned with a particular agenda or pushing forward some particular concern - in this case the amelioration of a public project - it may be that some other medium would be appropriate, be it a non-profit or a community group, for example, that lobbies for certain changes. Does anyone have any ideas about what groups or means exist to exert pressure on government, or ideas for ones that could exist?

As for the village itself, I have not been in Toronto for a few years and would have to walk the grounds to fully appreciate the site, but the architecture seems above average, the massing seems spot on, and the variance of use seems appropriate. It certainly isn't an unmitigated disaster - in fact it seems like quite an achievement, albeit one too shaded in gray. A different palate on the rest of the buildings would be in order.
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the update, i42. The massing of all these buildings is quite good. The little touches of colour at grade are most welcome – the green around doors, the blue and red glass. Loving that little forest of pillars, I hope they clad the underside of that overhang in something other than grey: perhaps wood or something warm. That two-story pavillion is pretty spandrel-y, though. The overall effect of the nabe is, like everyone's pointed out ad nauseam, quite grey, but it looks like the area has a lot of discoverability - interesting nooks and little surprises here and there. I'm still optimistic.
 
c449da0b-ef48-4e41-9926-192169b4d401_zpsa886d4ee.jpg
 
There appears to be some excavation on the southeasternmost site, but I had thought that it (the Ten Arquitectos project) was in flux / going under a different architect? What's happening there after all, have we heard any more on that?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top