Toronto Waterlink at Pier 27 | 43.89m | 14s | Cityzen | a—A

The problem I think is that the site is essentially dead-ended by Redpath, and retail fronting the waterside wouldn't be enough of a draw into the site.

I think there's going to be retail facing Queens Quay, so I think the site won't be as monolithically residential as one might think. On top of that, there's still a strip of potential green space on the west side of the site that might be a bigger draw- a restaurant pavilion might do well there.
 
isaidso said:
Nice building, hate the 'art'. It's not my cup of tea. If it at least looked good I'd give it a pass, but it doesn't.
Click to expand...
Love the art, particularly the Toronto Twister, closest to the lake. Amazingly complex and engaging. Looking forward to seeing it lit up at light at some point. No one's been down to shoot that yet.

42
 
Torontovibe said:
I agree! This is right at the foot of Yonge Street so it is a central as you can get on the waterfront and in the coming years, this area will be dense with many people, so it's a huge missed opportunity to not use this area in a much more prominant, animated way. It's a rather dull area as it is now, with few people enjoying the public space.
Click to expand...

jje1000 said:
The problem I think is that the site is essentially dead-ended by Redpath, and retail fronting the waterside wouldn't be enough of a draw into the site.

I think there's going to be retail facing Queens Quay, so I think the site won't be as monolithically residential as one might think. On top of that, there's still a strip of potential green space on the west side of the site that might be a bigger draw- a restaurant pavilion might do well there.
Click to expand...
Exactly: facing both Queens Quay and the park that will replace the parking lot, there's going to be a restaurant (I assume with a patio during the summertime). Putting that in, and completing the park alongside the quay down to the harbour's edge will draw more people down there, and a pedestrian bridge across to the ferry terminal area would be amazing too. Here's hoping that all comes together in the next few years.

Finishing development of Pier 27 with two more buildings, plus the gradual development of Pinnacle One Yonge and all of the Menkes Sugar Wharf buildings will bring tons more people to the area over the next decade (and a half, probably). I'm not worried longterm about public usage down there: it's only going to grow.

42
 
Just now:

20180806_203007.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 20180806_203007.jpg
    20180806_203007.jpg
    205.9 KB · Views: 952
I have to say I am very fond of that piece: I love in particular the mini-twister inserted into it, about a third of the way up, seen in the first photo above. When any of you are down there: get an up-close look at it (and look up through it from below). The complexity of the whole twister is impressive, and it's that much more-so of the twister-within-the-twister.

42
 
interchange42 said:
I have to say I am very fond of that piece: I love in particular the mini-twister inserted into it, about a third of the way up, seen in the first photo above. When any of you are down there: get an up-close look at it (and look up through it from below). The complexity of the whole twister is impressive, and it's that much more-so of the twister-within-the-twister.

42
Click to expand...
It's lovely indeed. But how can we call it "public art" as you have to go out of your way to reach it? It's not easy navigating that complex for a pedestrian, and let's be honest - the vast majority of those who will be enjoying the sculpture and promenade are the residents, not the "public".
 
raptor said:
It's lovely indeed. But how can we call it "public art" as you have to go out of your way to reach it? It's not easy navigating that complex for a pedestrian, and let's be honest - the vast majority of those who will be enjoying the sculpture and promenade are the residents, not the "public".
Click to expand...
I don't think a quota system is considered for what mix of residents and the public at large will see the art, as long as it is accessible to the public… but once the park is in place down the side of the slip as well, this art is the kind of thing that will help draw more people down to this stretch. Like the 'folly' that's been behind the Harbour Square condos for decades now, I see no reason not to adorn the slightly more 'secret' public areas of the city with art to surprise and delight those who find themselves there by chance or by design.

42
 
interchange42 said:
I don't think a quota system is considered for what mix of residents and the public at large will see the art, as long as it is accessible to the public… but once the park is in place down the side of the slip as well, this art is the kind of thing that will help draw more people down to this stretch. Like the 'folly' that's been behind the Harbour Square condos for decades now, I see no reason not to adorn the slightly more 'secret' public areas of the city with art to surprise and delight those who find themselves there by chance or by design.

42
Click to expand...
I agree with most of you said. However, the issue is not just the temporary parking lot (site of a future park), but also the driveway between the buildings (next to the beautiful sculpture) and the (closed) sales centre. All of the above make the (hidden) promenade and (hidden) sculpture un-inviting to the general public.
 
It's really not hard to navigate, it's a straight and clear walk directly south from the street. Everyone on this forum complains about it being secluded, but that's just because of Redpath blocking the extension of the promenade and Waterfront Toronto hasn't developed the parking lot into a park yet. Once Redpath is gone and the parking lot is a park, it'll be entirely normal and tons of people will see the art while walking the promenade.

The choice was clearly to have the developer (1) develop the site in a way that accommodates the fact Redpath is there but would look weird once Redpath is gone (such as putting all the density into one or two quite large+wide+tall buildings on the east side of the lot), or (2) develop the site in a way that assumes Redpath will be gone in the future. I think they made the right choice - envision how you want the area to look and make the choice that best allows that vision to happen.
 
Star Fox said:
It's really not hard to navigate, it's a straight and clear walk directly south from the street. Everyone on this forum complains about it being secluded, but that's just because of Redpath blocking the extension of the promenade and Waterfront Toronto hasn't developed the parking lot into a park yet. Once Redpath is gone and the parking lot is a park, it'll be entirely normal and tons of people will see the art while walking the promenade.

The choice was clearly to have the developer (1) develop the site in a way that accommodates the fact Redpath is there but would look weird once Redpath is gone (such as putting all the density into one or two quite large+wide+tall buildings on the east side of the lot), or (2) develop the site in a way that assumes Redpath will be gone in the future. I think they made the right choice - envision how you want the area to look and make the choice that best allows that vision to happen.
Click to expand...
Redpath is not going anywhere
 
I agree, all indications are that it's not going anywhere particularly soon, but medium-to-long term there is little doubt it will go (and that comes from someone who actually likes it).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top