D
DavidCapizzano
Guest
New SPA docs for block 4 uploaded May 26 - looks consistent with the earlier version but I have not combed through the details @Paclo
Last edited by a moderator:
Toronto Sugar Wharf Condominiums (Phase 2) | 283.6m | 85s | Menkes | a—A
- Thread starter interchange42
- Start date
D
DavidCapizzano
Guest
From the May 28th Waterfront Toronto DRP meeting
Resubmitted materials are primarily affirming the approved Minor Variances into the Site Plan Agreement -- with a further redistribution of the unit mix resulting in a decrease in proposed units across Block 4 from 2640 to 2606.
ushahid
Senior Member
GOLD GOLD GOLD. 
Simeon
New Member
I continue to be conflicted with the redesign of this project. On one hand I like it better than the original proposal and on the other hand I think due to the school component it and the lack thereof in the area it needs to be considerably large.
Also, despite me not being an urban planner, it seems very impractical to design for the school to be surrounded by main arterial roads and a major highway. Three large condos will be blocking the patrons of the school's access to the park. It makes more sense to have 3 condo buildings on the Northern end and school on the southern side with less vehicle congestion/pollution. Actually any appraiser would depreciate the value of the property due to the massive highway adjacent.
Also, despite me not being an urban planner, it seems very impractical to design for the school to be surrounded by main arterial roads and a major highway. Three large condos will be blocking the patrons of the school's access to the park. It makes more sense to have 3 condo buildings on the Northern end and school on the southern side with less vehicle congestion/pollution. Actually any appraiser would depreciate the value of the property due to the massive highway adjacent.
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
I suppose it would be more cost effective to build this way and in this market. But it's even more dull and lifeless then it was where I didn't think that was even possible... /sigh
Amare
Senior Member
I dont even know where to start with this, but i''ll summarize it all and say that this is just sterile and bland. A really bad prime waste of real estate as currently designed.
The ground treatment/streetwall is a disheveled mess, the "plaza" space is functionally useless as the design is currently proposed, the connection/integration (or lack thereoff) between the school and the towers are woefully pathetic and are literally an afterthought. Then you have the towers themselves which will literally just be straightened versions of 158 Front St E.
Sorry but this is just bad, all around. aA cant design a proper streetwall if their lives depended on it, and Menkes....well they arent even trying at this point if this is what they are envisioning.
The ground treatment/streetwall is a disheveled mess, the "plaza" space is functionally useless as the design is currently proposed, the connection/integration (or lack thereoff) between the school and the towers are woefully pathetic and are literally an afterthought. Then you have the towers themselves which will literally just be straightened versions of 158 Front St E.
Sorry but this is just bad, all around. aA cant design a proper streetwall if their lives depended on it, and Menkes....well they arent even trying at this point if this is what they are envisioning.
Last edited:
Civdis
Active Member
I actually like this new design. I love the vertical lines, much better than phase 1 in my opinion.
DarwinP
Active Member
Is this the actual project proposal? I hope not.
There’s barely any attempt at creating any architectural expression here. Featureless, lifeless, plain, basic, it all looks like a massing model and real state exercise and not a real project. This will be the new face of the Toronto skyline for generations to come. Is this the best we can come up with in 2025?. Embarrassing how little vision our developers and architects have.
Koops65
Senior Member
I like them... no balcony tricks, no fiddling around... very in your face!
Riseth
Senior Member
Ugh, no surprises here. More bland, mediocre infill on our waterfront that will make a blight on the skyline for generations to come.
Put these up by Vaughan Metropolitan Centre and they would fine, but for what will become one of the signature developments of the Toronto skyline for decades to come, this is trash. Who could have guessed 20 years ago that this would be the future image of Toronto?
Put these up by Vaughan Metropolitan Centre and they would fine, but for what will become one of the signature developments of the Toronto skyline for decades to come, this is trash. Who could have guessed 20 years ago that this would be the future image of Toronto?
Rascacielo
Senior Member
The irony is that VMC has more interesting towers than these.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
The podium levels are much better than before - I appreciate that. The towers are typical aA blandness. Will be well detailed I'm sure, but very standard, simple, and unremarkable.
prisecaru0
New Member
Imo i think they'll be very nice. I think more gold, less glass would be nice and maybe more interesting architectual massing but i rather this then some painted balcony gimmick seen on phase 1 to try make the building seem less bulky and straight out of a 5 yr olds minecraft server.
CanadianNational
Senior Member
A refined, understated bore is still a terrible bore. This sort of production was already a cliché with Aa fifteen, twenty years ago.
Toronto's skyline is choked with grey, glassy boxes. This site is way to prominent too give it up to such dull giants.
I hope it's sent back for a thorough revision.
Toronto's skyline is choked with grey, glassy boxes. This site is way to prominent too give it up to such dull giants.
I hope it's sent back for a thorough revision.