dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Presumably it gets put on hold? Perhaps reduced in height? If the forecast continues as is expected several pages worth of threads in this section of the forum will be going on hold or cancelled outright.
Toronto Ten York Street Condos | 224.02m | 65s | Tridel | Wallman Architects
- Thread starter maestro
- Start date
Presumably it gets put on hold? Perhaps reduced in height? If the forecast continues as is expected several pages worth of threads in this section of the forum will be going on hold or cancelled outright.
bmiller
Active Member
I'm sure by Christmas we'll have a good idea of how the market is going to respond. I wonder how many potential buyers will now wait for the result of the Mirvish and Oxford proposals before buying anything right now? Anyone who wants a place within the next 3 years will buy now. Any investors may wait for a more desirable building. 50 Bloor st., Mirvish- Gehry towers, Oxford railway lands proposal should be be high on the wait list.
wmedia
Senior Member
Yes sorry. I meant the city is afraid of colour in new construction. The CBD is a great example of how colour can work well, without being garish.
The more I look at this project, I realize I won't lose any sleep if it gets cancelled. This could have been a true landmark, but it will just blend into a wall of glass.
rpeters
Active Member
it looks like a city place building only taller, which makes it even worse as it ruins the skyline from the islands/cherry beach. I hope to god this does not get built.
Torontovibe
Senior Member
I agree, this will add nothing to the skyline but blandness. I like the podium but the tower is not good enough.
travis3000
Active Member
If any other city in Canada (or USA) had a proposed 750ft tower they would be ecstatic. I see we are pretty spoiled calling it "not good enough". I think the 65 stories is still good enough.
Big Daddy
Senior Member
The height is OK - although they reduced it, (removing its coolness factor) but the typical glass and spandrel exterior is certainly nothing to cheer about. This project is one that will definitely suffer from the Gehry and Oxford projects because of their location and likely superior design. If I were buying right now those are the two projects I would want to see before deciding. This project could have been something special - instead they went with "more of the same". Big yawn.
(And to close - if this one were stalled or cancelled, it might be an improvement.)
Last edited:
67Cup
Active Member
I think the key thing about this building is that it has attractive massing. Moreover, the podium is genuinely striking. It also utilizes a central but difficult parcel of land. Driving the Gardiner between this tower and the Ice towers will be very striking indeed. As far as I can judge from the renders, the cladding is not exciting but it is hardly offensive. On balance, I consider this proposal a plus for the city and, unlike a number of posters here, I hope it gets built.
yyzer
Senior Member
some very positive news regarding sales so far .......tweeted today by Andrew LaFleur.....
SixPoints
Active Member
Email sent by Tridel.
Tewder
Senior Member
A change to the colour alone would make this one stand out from the crowd. It's so painfully obvious. It's amazing how blind to context some developers can be.
Tridel
Active Member
It should be kept in mind to everyone who follows this thread what the design process was for Ten York.
It was submitted to a DESIGN REVIEW PANEL led by Waterfrontoronto.
Check earlier Ten York thread posts and the articles that Urban Toronto put together. Tridel and Wallman Architects first submitted a building with colour not only in the glass but with a lighting system to add more flare in the night with inspiration being the northern lights. A flatiron shape was not part of the tower's design. The design was rejected on the first submission.
Following direction and suggestions, a second design was submitted which again included colour and refutation of the flatiron design. This was rejected on second review. All these renderings can be found in earlier threads.
What we have now is what was approved by the design review panel on the third submission. The height was reduced, the north and south facades were simplified, the podium was made semi transparent, the podium was designed to accommodate setback requirements, make an impressive street level impression and include more trees. The minutes are online for anyone to review and links were posted into an earlier thread.
Urban Toronto reported on the second public meeting.
Urban Toronto reported on the final successful submission to the design review panels.
Hopefully this helps to clear up some misconceptions and gives you plenty of documentation to go back and make a full review.
taal
Senior Member
Is there going to be any lighting elements with the current design, it looks as if the roof element / podium will be lit up at night in some form or another ?
wmedia
Senior Member
Thank you Tridel webmaster. I think some of us on this forum (myself included) lash out at the wrong targets, mainly due to frustration. The truth behind why projects look as they do is usually more complex than most of us initially think.
The common theme in many recent announcements seems to be monotony and disappointment, so it's hard not to be frustrated. These buidings will be around for decades, so we need to get this right.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
I don't think it's fair to blame the DRP for the lack of colour in this design. The initial design had hardly any colour apart from the podium, and it was seen by the DRP as something that could be largely improved upon. The fact that the architects returned with something equally lacking in colour doesn't make it the DRP's fault.
I agree with people who think a signature tower here needs colour. The area is monotonous, and could use a building with some bold colours.
I agree with people who think a signature tower here needs colour. The area is monotonous, and could use a building with some bold colours.