Hamilton The Brockton | 75.4m | 24s | Effort Group | KNYMH

[DavidCapizzano]

12 Storey infill apartment & town houses. Architect is McCallum Sather.

Source: http://forestcatharine.urbanshare.info/wp-content/uploads/2017/02/073-15-Urban-Design-Report_Dec-21-2016.pdf

 

[innsertnamehere]

new design - now 14 storeys and 43.6m tall with a new zoning application filed:

 

[Paclo]

Thanks @innsertnamehere , the database has been updated.

The architect is now KNYMH

 

[Hawrylyshyn]

Increased to 24 floors / 75.3m - Architectural Package (2nd submission)

 

[KingJames]

Not the prettiest, but probably nicest on the block. The good thing with Effort is that they usually build, and they do it without flash or fanfare.

 

[Chris R.]

Increased to 24 floors / 75.3m - Architectural Package (2nd submission)

Glad to hear this. Always thought this could use some density increase.

Surprised to see it proposed with so much parking considering the location and the Corktown Plaza's difficulties with selling parking.

 

[Stec]

Wow I was not expecting this but I am pleased with the density increase.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Parking is definitely odd here - 220 spaces for 248 units.

This is likely a rental building so Effort is more concerned about making sure units are leasable than a condo investor may be.. but still. I assume some of it at least must be replacing parking for the existing apartment building, but I also doubt that building is "oversubscribed" in terms of parking rentals either.

 

[BrenWilson]

That two storey entrance driveway is a straight downgrade from the previous design.

 

[junctionist]

Not the prettiest, but probably nicest on the block. The good thing with Effort is that they usually build, and they do it without flash or fanfare.

The short tower with the arches at street level next door looks more interesting. The arches are a more unique feature than any architectural feature this proposal has to offer. It also has masonry up to almost the top of the building, unlike this proposal. Strangely, this proposal has seen a downgrade in its design even as density has increased significantly.

 

[christiesplits]

I like everything except the peach colour of the tower. Will it stand out like a sore thumb from Sam Lawrence Park?

 

[Chronamut]

The short tower with the arches at street level next door looks more interesting. The arches are a more unique feature than any architectural feature this proposal has to offer. It also has masonry up to almost the top of the building, unlike this proposal. Strangely, this proposal has seen a downgrade in its design even as density has increased significantly.

Don't you know? Pretty much all interesting buildings are downgraded to boring blocky architecture in this city. The only time we see arches is if core urban builds something.

There is nothing architecturally significant about this building anymore. It's just meh. Infill meh.

40 years from now people are gonna bemoan why there is so much crapitecture in this city and people will respond "because people felt cramming more people in the city was more important than actual attractive design"

and it's true, which is why I bark every time someone uses that excuse.

..not that ANY of these designs were particularly pretty, they ALL were blocky and rectangular. Arches generally were used structurally, now its more expensive and people have no need for them so theyr'e trying to make rectangles chic. They are not. If you think so you are wrong. Lol. Ever look at any view in Toronto? Its just a sea of rectangles to the point its just a jumble of shapes - nothing stands out. We are aiming to build a sea of mediocrity in our city.

Csase in point - canary house area of toronto - rectangles, everywhere. Even patterns are created with rectangles, like that purple building lol.

 

[KingJames]

Don't you know? Pretty much all interesting buildings are downgraded to boring blocky architecture in this city. The only time we see arches is if core urban builds something.

There is nothing architecturally significant about this building anymore. It's just meh. Infill meh.

40 years from now people are gonna bemoan why there is so much crapitecture in this city and people will respond "because people felt cramming more people in the city was more important than actual attractive design"

and it's true, which is why I bark every time someone uses that excuse.

..not that ANY of these designs were particularly pretty, they ALL were blocky and rectangular. Arches generally were used structurally, now its more expensive and people have no need for them so theyr'e trying to make rectangles chic. They are not. If you think so you are wrong. Lol. Ever look at any view in Toronto? Its just a sea of rectangles to the point its just a jumble of shapes - nothing stands out. We are aiming to build a sea of mediocrity in our city.

That is why OVG is preserving the historically significant rounded exterior of the original Copps Coliseum, just to address these types of concerns.

 

[Chronamut]

That is why OVG is preserving the historically significant rounded exterior of the original Copps Coliseum, just to address these types of concerns.

Gooo curves and angles! I get in some cases such things reduce footprint useability but it can all be done smartly - look at any futuristic cityscape - lots of angles and shapes - if this is the future I want it to LOOK like the future hehe..

 

[BrenWilson]

like that purple building lol.

Hey now, scotia tower is a pretty sweet vaguely pomo tower