Toronto Quartz at Concord CityPlace | 131.97m | 41s | Concord Adex | RAW Design

They have installed a few floors of the blue and white panels...and it's looking decent and interesting. A nice addition to CP along with the colour of Spectra. Sorry no photos...haven't had time to get out of my car as I pass by recently lol. But I will take some when the exterior is more substantial.
 
Sept 14th

The exterior appeared more substantial 3 days later :p

IMG_0019.jpg


IMG_0021.jpg


IMG_0023.jpg


IMG_0024.jpg



I don't normally like blue on a building, but I'm really liking Quartz!
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0019.jpg
    IMG_0019.jpg
    97.9 KB · Views: 676
  • IMG_0021.jpg
    IMG_0021.jpg
    101 KB · Views: 694
  • IMG_0023.jpg
    IMG_0023.jpg
    101.4 KB · Views: 703
  • IMG_0024.jpg
    IMG_0024.jpg
    101.3 KB · Views: 706
looks good! So why did the developer wait until nearly the west end of the cityplace property to put in some color (Library District and Quartz)?
 
Library District is a different developer. I guess Concord had to wait for someone else to do it first. Then colour didn't look so scary to them. I wish they would have started with Parade because I find the colour of those towers, just dreadful.
 
Torontovibe said:
Library District is a different developer. I guess Concord had to wait for someone else to do it first. Then colour didn't look so scary to them. I wish they would have started with Parade because I find the colour of those towers, just dreadful.
Click to expand...

Parade's dull grey cladding didn't turn out well. The renderings showed bright orange accent panels enlivening the podium, but Concord installed dull orange-beige panels in the end.
 
ducati0000 said:
Library District is a nice section,but still over all City Place is a mess in planning.
Click to expand...

Really? I like how it's shaping up with, you know, actual roads and buildings and parks, and trees, and retail, and patios, and people, and pets, and sports, and farmer's markets, and summer concerts, and outdoor parties. I guess some people enjoyed the former railways lands as a driving range better than this.

I like this much better :p
 
RiverCity1 said:
Really? I like how it's shaping up with, you know, actual roads and buildings and parks, and trees, and retail, and patios, and people, and pets, and sports, and farmer's markets, and summer concerts, and outdoor parties. I guess some people enjoyed the former railways lands as a driving range better than this.

I like this much better :p
Click to expand...

There is no question that the current land uses are exponentially better than a driving range and...well...a wasteland, but it isn't too difficult to improve upon a wasteland. I do, for the record, enjoy CityPlace. The place is no doubt becoming a very successful community, but ducati0000's comments about the way in which the community was planned do have merit. CityPlace is a huge improvement over any previous use of that land, but from a planning perspective there are a handful of things that would have probably worked better for a huge blank slate like that. Organic growth is always going to be tricky in a community built mostly by one developer, and even if you like CP as I do, it is hard not to recognize its shortcomings.
 
There's a lot to like about Cityplace. Personally, my main complaints go to the first four towers along Front Street (and that 'Gallery' building - an architectural no-go if there ever was one).
Other than that, and quibbles, I'm pretty surprised at how well it is turning out. A lot has improved since the first few buildings went in.

My only remaining big wish is that Concord would nix plans for the tower at the site of the planned community centre and school.
I think the green space that fronts cityplace (currently partly planned park, partly sloping hole-in-the-ground) should stay open, much like the way it is at the moment. Perhaps transfer density? That could mean designing the school and community centre to incorporate it's own playing fields (e.g. green roofs, Vancouver Convention Centre....) and gain more parkland than was initially planned a decade ago. It's clear already that the development is so super-dense that more green space in this spot would be a benefit and not a problem.
 
That was never going to be a Concord tower as part of the school site, but a TCHC one. That's been cancelled now… or at least for now, and by that I mean that until a shovel is in the ground to build the school/community centre complex and no tower goes up as part of that, I won't feel confident that it's totally cancelled.

42
 
interchange42 said:
and by that I mean that until a shovel is in the ground to build the school/community centre complex and no tower goes up as part of that, I won't feel confident that it's totally cancelled.

42
Click to expand...

That is exactly what is happening. The schools are moving forward without the tower part of the project. The city split up the site in two to allow the schools to move forward, and no one knows how to make a tower work on the site. (According to Adam Vaughan and city Planning staff) Seems like there is an issue with the height restriction placed on the site, and the cost of the land.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top