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

^Very good argument. That being said, I still think it is a stretch to say that this project will "ruin" Yonge St.
they say don't judge a book by its cover but we are judging a book that hasn't even been read or seen by anyone yet. These preliminary renders dont mean squat
 
someMidTowner said:
^Very good argument. That being said, I still think it is a stretch to say that this project will "ruin" Yonge St.
they say don't judge a book by its cover but we are judging a book that hasn't even been read or seen by anyone yet. These preliminary renders dont mean squat
Click to expand...


still, the towers will be awefully close to yonge st. no matter which way you cut it. 5ive is approx. 30 metres off of yonge and 8 gloucester is 20 metres off - the 501 and 460 proposals are less than 10 metres off. and at much higher heights as well.
 
The 501 & 460 projects are right on Yonge Street, aside from the curb and sidewalk of course and 501 will have the hulking parking garage at the edge of the sidewalk on Yonge.
 
Why can't towers be right on Yonge? What's wrong with that? If there's anywhere in the city that should be lined with such density it's Yonge. Is this apprehension to towers on Yonge simply due to the precedent that it will set, which will in turn lead to destruction of existing architecture on Yonge? Or is it about towers on Yonge itself being objectionable? If the former, since when are buildings along Yonge so exquisite that we should be so vigilant about their preservation? Perhaps I'm architecturally ignorant, but in my experience, most of the buildings on Yonge from Bloor to Queen are among the ugliest, newest, and least worthy of preservation in the city (like the current form of 501 yonge, for instance, Yonge & Dundas, Eaton Centre area, etc.).
 
arvelomcquaig said:
Why can't towers be right on Yonge? What's wrong with that? If there's anywhere in the city that should be lined with such density it's Yonge. Is this apprehension to towers on Yonge simply due to the precedent that it will set, which will in turn lead to destruction of existing architecture on Yonge? Or is it about towers on Yonge itself being objectionable? If the former, since when are buildings along Yonge so exquisite that we should be so vigilant about their preservation? Perhaps I'm architecturally ignorant, but in my experience, most of the buildings on Yonge from Bloor to Queen are among the ugliest, newest, and least worthy of preservation in the city (like the current form of 501 yonge, for instance, Yonge & Dundas, Eaton Centre area, etc.).
Click to expand...

I'm not opposed to towers forming an apron on Yonge, but some locals have quite a strong opposition to it. The experience on Bay has left many locals apprehensive about going tall on Yonge due to the banality of Bay Street. They equate tall with that and don't accept that tall doesn't have to be that way.

Toronto's small stock of grand pre-war architecture in comparison to cities like Chicago, London, New York, Paris, etc. is also at play. There's a rush to save everything that's old regardless of its functionality, appropriateness, scale, quality, architectural merit. Meld that with the penchant for Canadians to compromise and you have a perfect storm where modest 2-3 Yonge Street row houses are to be saved regardless of whether it makes sense to do so. Towers represent the threat to that salvage job.

Lastly, the city is growing so quickly that there will always be a segment of the population that fails to keep up with the pace of change or to recognize where the city is heading. Many still view Toronto as a 2012 version of its 1980s self despite all the evidence that Toronto is transforming into a major international metropolis.

5ive will be an interesting experiment in the model these people want to repeat along most of Yonge. I like the development, but view its replication along the rest of the street as a major mistake. Toronto must not go down that road.
 
Last edited:
someMidTowner said:
^Very good argument. That being said, I still think it is a stretch to say that this project will "ruin" Yonge St.
they say don't judge a book by its cover but we are judging a book that hasn't even been read or seen by anyone yet. These preliminary renders dont mean squat
Click to expand...

I disagree, I think the fact that they have not provided any real renders of this site infers that they have no intention investing in a building that will be iconic or even attractive. We have seen great renders for other developments (Aura, 1 Bloor, E condos etc) long before development has been finalized – but nothing here other that the infamous line drawing they provided for initial zoning review in June of 2011. I think we’re in for a real stinker – but I would love to be wrong.
 
Last edited:
Big Daddy said:
I disagree, I think the fact that they have not provided any real renders of this site infers that they have no intention investing in a building that will be iconic or even attractive.
Click to expand...


You infer. Those facts imply.


2264060604_eed7fc6a36_m.jpg
 
Why bother? They have been told numerous times before (by a variety of members) that the line drawings do not represent the final product. They didn't listen then, why would they now?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The line drawings most definitely did represent what Lanterra had in mind and was ready to go ahead with if they received approvals.

The reason they are not the final design is because of the working group that was set up as a result of intense opposition at the neighbourhood meeting. In the working group, some good compromises have been made, with some fairly significant changes made to the project, especially the arrangement and design of the lobbies/retail/overall podium.
 
Their designs almost always end up like the bland line drawings anyway.

Until they come out with a design that's completely different in almost any way, my opinion will be that it is going to be a no-context boring couple of boxes inappropriate for the area.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
The "context" is not just about the architectural style applied - but also that of the built form. There is nothing contexual about 2 58s tower on that site, regardless of whether they are boring glass boxes or not.

AoD
 
Last edited:
There is something I'm not getting. Where is the "official" word that what we've seen so far is just massing? I believe that what we see is what we get.

This project is crap from a street life perspective and the city should push hard for a lot more animation on Yonge. And I can't stomach the repetitious approach to tower design, either. The developer mustn't get away with that.
 
TonyV said:
There is something I'm not getting. Where is the "official" word that what we've seen so far is just massing? I believe that what we see is what we get.
Click to expand...

For the fiftieth time I'd like to point out that through the working group, the developer and architect have reconfigured the design.
 
I understand not everyone has the same tastes in terms of design / structures and what not, but why would you wish for something to be canceled? Something like that has an economical impact beyond the structure not being built.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top