Toronto

River City Condos Phases 1 & 2 | ?m | 16s | Urban Capital | ZAS Architects

299 bloor call control.

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 2, 2007
Messages
1,971
Reaction score
65
they likely will, considering the detailed urban design guidelines and block plans that exist for the West Don Lands, although the form of the tower buildings will be more open to architectural play.
 

EnviroTO

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
3,946
Reaction score
55
Location
Yonge & Mt.Pleasant
Urban Capital / Redquartz was selected to handle phase one of the West Don Lands development project with sales launch in January 2009 and occupancy 2011. The first phase is the River Square Neighbourhood bound by King, Bayview, Don River Park, and St. Lawrence Street.

Urban Capital hasn't created anything horrendous. I think The Sylvia is their worst project which isn't anything near a University Plaza style disaster. I'm surprised they won the bid though. I would have thought a bigger developer would have been selected.

Unforunately the RFQ submissions aren't online. The Urban Capital / Redquartz team is using Saucier + Perrotte Architects, ZAS Architects, StossLU Landscape Architects, and Enermodal Engineering LEED Consultants.
 

Necessary Evil

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 7, 2007
Messages
353
Reaction score
58
Urban Capital / Redquartz was selected to handle phase one of the West Don Lands development project with sales launch in January 2009 and occupancy 2011. The first phase is the River Square Neighbourhood bound by King, Bayview, Don River Park, and St. Lawrence Street.

Urban Capital hasn't created anything horrendous. I think The Sylvia is their worst project which isn't anything near a University Plaza style disaster. I'm surprised they won the bid though. I would have thought a bigger developer would have been selected.

Unforunately the RFQ submissions aren't online. The Urban Capital / Redquartz team is using Saucier + Perrotte Architects, ZAS Architects, StossLU Landscape Architects, and Enermodal Engineering LEED Consultants.
Here's a link to the article on this from today's Star:
http://www.thestar.com/comment/columnists/article/417799
 

Jayomatic

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
864
Reaction score
15
Excited that Saucier + Perrotte Architects are involved. Really can't wait to see what they come up with.
 

alklay

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,086
Reaction score
253
This sounds like a great team and very good news.

This area has the potential to really change how the city looks in its built form. It appears that the bar for each and every aspect of this area is quite high and while not everything will be able to reach the height (ie Corus), at least we are aiming high (which is more than what we appear to be doing in other parts of the city).

The waterfront appears to be getting a lot of things right.
 

Skeezix

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
4,343
Reaction score
2,667
Location
East of this, west of that
I think there is a lot of potential in the waterfront plan, but I wish they would have had the foresight to use the CN Tower as the catalyst for development and planning 30 years ago. The opportunity to create a premiere tourism experience that incorporated the waterfront and tower is forever lost. The tower now is just that. It's not like the Eiffel tower with any sort of beautiful lead up to it, or anything worth seeing/doing around it.

Be careful what you wish for. The CN Tower was part of a comprehensive plan -- the godawful Metro Centre project. Given that Metro Centre would have resulted in the demolition of Union Station, I think Toronto is much better off at the end of the day that the 1970s era urban renewal scheme never got off the ground.
 

Skeezix

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 25, 2007
Messages
4,343
Reaction score
2,667
Location
East of this, west of that
If it's such a jewel, why do we need taxpayer's money to build it?
None of the necessary infrastructure exists (roads, sewers, water, parks, transit, libraries, etc.) to support the proposed residential and commercial densities.

Where do you think all of that infrastructure elsewhere in the City came from? In recent years, some of it came from development charges and Section 37 (as it will on the Waterfront), but the vast majority of it came from the taxpayers.
 

marcus_a_j

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,851
Reaction score
551
I posted this in the "Neighbourhoods" sub-thread...

from NRU, July 11, 2008

DESIGNING RIVER CITY

Panel sees residential

Members of the waterfront design review panel got their first shot at critiquing the plans for River City, the waterfront’s premier residential neighbourhood.

Developer David Wex, of Urban Capital Property Group and architects Gilles Saucier and Andre Perrotte of Saucier + Perrotte Architects presented their vision, which has been created along with ZAS Architects, Redquartz Development and Stos_landscapeurbanism.

“This is the first development team selected by Waterfront Toronto through the RFP process,†chair Bruce Kuwabara of KPMB Architects told the other panel members just before the presentation at Wednesday’s meeting.

“There’s nothing else like it in Toronto…and it’s really refreshing to see a building that doesn’t look like every other building in the city,†he added afterward.

The site is located in the area squared off by King Street in the north, the new Don River Park in the south (at Eastern Avenue), St. Lawrence Street in the west and Bayview Avenue in the east.

River City, as it’s being touted, is at the northeast tip of the West Don Lands precinct and is hugged to the south by railroad lines and the Gardiner Expressway. The Don Valley Parkway runs up the east side of the development and the elevated part of Eastern Avenue going over the DVP runs through the middle of the development.

The team presented early concepts showing town houses along the extended River Street, and the panel requested more detail on “the townhouses’ relationship to the street.†Also, plans for a 14-storey tower with a smaller 10-storey tower that allows a western view of the city for the taller tower’s top floor residents got the nod from panellists.

The panel recognized that the team would come back with a more detailed design at a later date but asked for more specifics on noise-control. The panel also took issue with the all-glass dark buildings, saying they are not energy efficient and challenged the team to come back with a strategy for taking advantage of solar energy.

A challenge for the architects was to design the development on a flood protection plain,
which meant no underground parking. They presented the idea of a two-level above-ground parking structure, topped with a courtyard for the residents only. Panellists suggested the side walls of the parking garage be somewhat transparent for safety reasons.

The entire development represents a $250-to-$300 million private sector investment in waterfront area revitalization and proposes 900-residential units and 268 aboveground
parking spots. Unit sales are expected to begin in early 2009 with construction scheduled
to begin in 2010. Toronto Community Housing is also building 130 units of affordable housing on site.

 

Jayomatic

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
864
Reaction score
15
Sounds like the panelists are on crack. No solid glass, and they want to see parking spaces!!!
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
25,930
Reaction score
12,852
Location
Toronto
Thanks marcus.

Jayo:

Not necessarily - as sexy as all glass buildings can be, it's not very energy efficient - I believe the Regent Park green guildlines call for a 50/50 mix of glazing and opaque materials, for example.

As to the parking garage - I think what they meant was having some sort of glazing instead of something like a sheer brick wall with no visibility of any kind...

AoD
 
Top