Toronto TeaHouse 501 Yonge Condominiums | 170.98m | 52s | Lanterra | a—A

[adma]

I'm guarded, because what's been presented is so obviously schematic it hurts. However, when it comes to the aA-glass-shaft backlash: let's say that given the built evidence so far (Burano, f'rinstance), aA promise more in the way of crystalline exhilaration than they deliver. Unfortunately, too-heavy mullions and too-opaque glass tend to get in the way--at this point, if you want something that *does* deliver the experience aA intended, you might as well refer to the grubby old Scientology building at Yonge + St Mary w/its original windows which'd surely not pass muster by modern-day constructional standards...

 

[ProjectEnd]

No, I did too and I don't care how inappropriate my next comment is.... I am revving up the engines on my 767's to rid Toronto of these when they are built.

^But it is morals...

"We, as the City, feel that anything over 50 floors would negatively impact on the surrounding neighbourhood and the residents who live there. Their lives will be disrupted and hindered by the increased population. Their views will be obliterated and the amount of sunlight they receive will be diminished. All of these reasons amount to a standard of living that is unacceptable for the existing residents and we are here to protect their rights. Furthermore, we stand by our beliefs.....

Oh... You're gunna give us 2 million bucks?...

Right then.... off you go!"

Ethics, morals or standards... Call it what you like... They are up for sale.

Sorry Moral Man. You lost all credibility with that stunning display on the previous page.

 

[UD2]

i have no problems with these two buildings. it is a huge leap forward from what we have now. I'll take any improvements over the current status quo.

People complain too much. More condos = more revenue for the city = more services for less taxes.

these condos don't even look bad. And that stretch of Yonge street can use some glass towers too.

 

[Mongo]

Also keep in mind that the only photo of the line elevation we have seen is severely foreshortened, making the project appear quite a bit shorter and more squat than it actually would be. Also, we only have one elevation (west?), and without a north or south view (or preferably an overhead site plan) we do not know if the two towers are aligned north-south or staggered, or indeed if they are rectangular boxes or semi-circular (I doubt they are, but with only one elevation we cannot tell).

 

[TonyV]

Now I think that is all from me until I see an official render.

I know I said I'd wait until I see an official render, but hell, it's Friday ....

As many have said, aA has done brilliant work, and even Theatre Park, which is really just aA's usual work with crazy banding added, is fairly brilliant, but I get the feeling that the 501 Yonge development is not that inspired ... and I am starting to think "he started as a really hot date, but now it's the same old restaurant all the time .... ".

Plus: must everything be rectilinear? I would love a quality architectural mash-up in this section of Toronto. A bit of eye-grabbing wouldn't hurt, with a strong Yonge presence. This is a perfect place for "look at me" stuff, and this proposal just ain't that. aA: go crazy ... knock yourselves out!

 

[toraerach]

Still, I don't think the height is entirely the issue. It's the artless boneheadedness of this drawing. Also weighing in is the narrowness of Yonge Street and it's sidewalks here, shadowing (is only Nathan Philips Square the only precinct really protected?) and the possible precedent for blockbusting being set.

I want to see Yonge revitalized badly. But I don't want to see it badly revitalized.

Agreed. My main issue is with the podium, especially with the feeble attempt to break-up it's façade into narrower sections. It might look a bit nice if each section had different glazing - I'm picturing a vibrant rainbow of colour, but I somehow doubt that will happen. The podium is just too big and monotonous. It will overpower this lowrise retail stretch without contributing anything of cultural/civic (a la Lightbox) or architectural value (like Five, or even the relatively hulking College Park). Developers and potential residents need to learn that they will have to sacrifice something to live on Toronto's bustling main street - in this case, seven stories of above-grade parking.

As for general criticisms of aA - I think history will be a kinder judge than us. I mean, I can just imagine what a Victorian Era UT would look like ("not ANOTHER bay and gable"). The proliferation of one style of building cultivates a sense of urban cohesion - we talk about one familiar style, one era - not in the myopic terms of one building in isolation. Then again, I also think we'll eventually learn to love our commie blocks, so take that as you may...

 

[myfive]

People complain too much. More condos = more revenue for the city = more services for less taxes.

.

Unfortunately it doesn't work that way. The formula is:

More condos=more revenues=more spending=HIGHER deficits!!!

Doesn't make any sense, but that is the nature of government.

 

[Tewder]

As for general criticisms of aA - I think history will be a kinder judge than us. I mean, I can just imagine what a Victorian Era UT would look like ("not ANOTHER bay and gable"). The proliferation of one style of building cultivates a sense of urban cohesion - we talk about one familiar style, one era - not in the myopic terms of one building in isolation. Then again, I also think we'll eventually learn to love our commie blocks, so take that as you may...

I agree with this. One Christopher Wren was pretty much like another, similarly one Haussmann avenue or one NYC tower with set-backs... and in each case it is a process of design 'natural selection' that determines over time the evolving vernacular of a city. To which:

Slowly but surely, the aA point towers are turning into modern-day commie slabs.

... and so what of it? Isnt it really just the evolution of an ongoing design vernacular in Toronto? Rightly or wrongly Toronto likes its boxes and slabs, to put it simply. They are the norm and not the exception. They form the predominant design aesthetic in the city. To hate this is, fundamentally, to hate Toronto. Not to say there cannot be exceptions and icons but these things cannot be registered as such without a vernacular to play off against (hence the criticisms of Dubai).

At the end of the day Toronto reveals itself time and again to be at heart a phlegmatic and endlessly 'practical' place as is witnessed in the utility of our public spaces, the relative lack of monuments or monumentalism and the relative banality of our design/architecture. In this sense Toronto is a 'mean' city. And if at times in our past, whether through the influence of colonial affiliations or American ambition/innovation, we have flirted with other ideas we inevitably drift back to the design pragmatism that is a reflection of who we are...

In this sense I just don't get the vehement reaction to aA. They are doing their job quite well in most cases, contributing to a Toronto design vernacular rather than building monuments... and again, not to say there shouldn't be monuments but if this is truly your thing then what the hell is it about Toronto that you would find so inspiring to start with?

 

[jje1000]

Unfortunately it doesn't work that way. The formula is:

More condos=more revenues=more spending=HIGHER deficits!!!

Doesn't make any sense, but that is the nature of government.

My sarcasmeter is beeping, and I hope it's right.

 

[Traynor]

Sorry Moral Man. You lost all credibility with that stunning display on the previous page.

My Brother-in-Law died in the North Tower on 9/11... I get a pass to say that.

And furthermore... Off colour jokes may not be palatable, but they are honest. They say how one feels, so your "Credibility Meter" is off kilter and being triggered by the wrong stimulus. My "honesty is the best policy" moral fibre stands as is.

 

[buildup]

My Brother-in-Law died in the North Tower on 9/11... I get a pass to say that.

And furthermore... Off colour jokes may not be palatable, but they are honest. They say how one feels, so your "Credibility Meter" is off kilter and being triggered by the wrong stimulus. My "honesty is the best policy" moral fibre stands as is.

If off colour jokes are ok, then why fabricate that story about a brother-in-law? In any case, were it true, its his tragedy not yours - meaning his loss doesn't translate into your gain (the 'free pass' you refer to).

 

[Traynor]

If off colour jokes are ok, then why fabricate that story about a brother-in-law? In any case, were it true, its his tragedy not yours - meaning his loss doesn't translate into your gain (the 'free pass' you refer to).

????What????

I am dumbfounded by the stupidity of this...

First, it is true and I don't care if you don't believe me... And the family left behind are the ones that feel loss... The dead are dead and feel nothing. Furthermore it's the same as Blacks being able to say the "N" word or Gays saying the "F" word... There is a perceived sense of entitlement when one is that close to a situation... Which I am, so hence I can say that joke...

And still further...

STFU

 

[Redroom Studios]

Traynor, I'm with you completely on everything you've said in the last couple pages... unfortunately I dont have more energy to interject any deeper than that.

And Tewder - what happened to you? You used to be one of the most vocal supporters of good urban design. You took some harsh criticism for that and I noticed your views becoming less entrenched which was understandable. But now you've completely given up, switched teams and jumped ship so that you now support poor urban design. I'm confused and disappointed.

 

[buildup]

????What????

I am dumbfounded by the stupidity of this...

First, it is true and I don't care if you don't believe me... And the family left behind are the ones that feel loss... The dead are dead and feel nothing. Furthermore it's the same as Blacks being able to say the "N" word or Gays saying the "F" word... There is a perceived sense of entitlement when one is that close to a situation... Which I am, so hence I can say that joke...

And still further...

STFU

Sorry Taynor, sometimes I shake my head at the crap i write.

 

[ProjectEnd]

My Brother-in-Law died in the North Tower on 9/11... I get a pass to say that.

And furthermore... Off colour jokes may not be palatable, but they are honest. They say how one feels, so your "Credibility Meter" is off kilter and being triggered by the wrong stimulus. My "honesty is the best policy" moral fibre stands as is.

No. You don't.

And to think that because you lost someone in that tragedy, you are somehow able to joke tastelessly about it is absurd. What's more, you even state in your original post: "I don't care how inappropriate my next comment is..." indicating that you are at least aware that it's not a Kosher Dill.

????What????

I am dumbfounded by the stupidity of this...

First, it is true and I don't care if you don't believe me... And the family left behind are the ones that feel loss... The dead are dead and feel nothing. Furthermore it's the same as Blacks being able to say the "N" word or Gays saying the "F" word... There is a perceived sense of entitlement when one is that close to a situation... Which I am, so hence I can say that joke...

And still further...

STFU

Sure, they might be able to use those words, but how many of them do? I'm aware that the shock value of those terms leads plenty of people utter them but I don't know of many self-respecting black or gay folks who use them on a regular basis (kinda like those who trumpet their 'white' or 'straight' pride are often the ones most unsure of themselves).

Traynor, I'm with you completely on everything you've said in the last couple pages... unfortunately I dont have more energy to interject any deeper than that.

And Tewder - what happened to you? You used to be one of the most vocal supporters of good urban design. You took some harsh criticism for that and I noticed your views becoming less entrenched which was understandable. But now you've completely given up, switched teams and jumped ship so that you now support poor urban design. I'm confused and disappointed.

So you're 'with' moronic 9/11 jokes and the use of epithets, provided that those spreading them are 'close' to the 'situation' in question? That's a pretty far fall Redroom. Next time you shouldn't enter firefights without the proper 'energy,' especially when the issues at hand are this important.

Also, Tewder is right on the mark.