Toronto Time and Space Condos | 101.8m | 29s | Pemberton | Wallman Architects

It's better just by the fact that they switched to red brick. That is a big plus but the over-all look of this building, is not very attractive. I would prefer just one level of retail along Front Street but they also need to line Sherbourne and The Esplanade, with retail or public use spaces. This also needs to be separated into 2 to 4 different buildings. It's just too big of a space to be one hulking mass. It needs a lot more changes, including shorter towers. It's just too tall for St. Lawrence/Old-Town/The Esplanade.
 
The DRP voted for redesign:

http://www1.toronto.ca/City Of Toro...Design/Files/pdf/DRP/DRP Minutes Feb 2014.pdf

Chairs Summary of Key Points

Panel was near unanimous is it's appreciation of the podium component of 177 Front Street East. Streetscape improvements were welcome, form and articulation of the base appeared effective, and the breaking up of the perimeter block showed promise. There were many concerns about the courtyard, however, as Panel members felt it would be dominated by car and truck movements and cease to perform as a public realm asset to either the development or the City. Panel was equally unanimous in their critical view of the height, placement, and number of towers on the podium. While the design incorporates significant set backs from the south and north edges, these are done at the expense of tower separation distances, which are well below Tall Building Guidelines; as well, Panel observed that height and tower proximity to each other would result in a reading of a single mass, for the most part obscuring sky view, and aggregating as a single shadow impact. Most significantly, the proposed building heights bring into question the question of context. As this project is so much taller - by a factor of 2 - than nearby approved projects, it so greatly exceeds the original intent of the transitions between surrounding context and the original 10 blocks, that Panel found the proposal wholly incompatible with historic and approved built form.
 
Good. This thing is a mess. The previous version just radiated contempt for the neighbourhood around it. This redesign is much improved, but still light-years away from being appropriate or contextual.
 
Podium's not bad but everything else is complete garbage. It's a big parcel of land. They should be able to come up with something a lot better than that.
 
I disagree with most people here who like the base but not the towers. The podium is too tall. It's 13 to 17 stories, which from the ground level as a pedestrian is very tall. The podium alone will shade the sidestreets in summer and create ridiculous wind tunnels in winter. You won't even see the towers from the ground nearby. I think the podium needs to be much shorter, and more importantly, the entire property needs to be divided into multiple building sections with gaps or passages through it, rather than one large enormous hulking impenetrable mass from all sides.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
the new renders clearly show the base at 10 floors with a significant step back after the 8th.
Click to expand...

You're right. I'm guilty of reading the text, which I see now was referring to the *old* renders. And I can see now that in the new render the podium is a few stories shorter than 222 The Esplanade, the condo building immediately to the east, which is 12 stories. This makes me feel a bit better -- if they've shortened the podium a bit and added a tower, I prefer that.
 
New post about this development on BlogTO:

20140325-Front-Aerial-Alt.jpg
 
Apparently the developer is barrelling on with this truly ghastly proposal and has decided to appeal to the OMB on the basis that the City has not responded within the 120 day deadline.
 
DSC said:
Apparently the developer is barrelling on with this truly ghastly proposal and has decided to appeal to the OMB on the basis that the City has not responded within the 120 day deadline.
Click to expand...

What are the chances this monstrosity gets approved in its current form by the OMB? I'm a noob.
 
Last edited:
Almost none, at least at this scale. there is no precedent. They would likely mandate that it be dropped to heights similar to 154 front, as well as similar FAR ratios.
 
yes but 154 got cut down the the area precedent before approval.. Its no taller than the Globe and Mail building. This may receive approval on a scaled down version, but on this scale and height it will not. They are asking for 10 floors over what 154 Front got.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top