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

unimaginative2 said:
I'd much rather have Jacobs' formulas in a "design-free" zone (why does that have to be either/or?) than Clewes' designs in a city-free zone.
Click to expand...

Then spend some quality time enjoying Jacob's formulas on Bay Street, with it's mix of commercial, residential and offices, where the grid is respected and there are no superblock developments. Meanwhile, I'll be enjoying the new boardwalk along the lake.
 
Are you joking? Bay Street is nothing but superblock developments, from Bloor to the lake. It's filled with developments just like Pier 27. I much prefer strolling on Queen Street, which is superblock-free.
 
There isn't a single building on Bay Street that takes up an entire block. Unless you're opposed to Old City Hall. Then again, it doesn't have a convenience store in it, so you probably are.
 
But Queen does have superblock portions, like between Yonge and University...that stretch of Queen also happens to be dank and miserable.
 
All sorts of Bay street condo towers are cluttered up with politically correct street level retail that isn't a draw to anyone who doesn't live in the buildings. Who is going to travel across town to go to a dry cleaner or buy a Snickers bar? I doubt if many of the people who live in those condos visit them much either.

There are superblock developments that don't fit this idea of shop-till-we-drop-at-street-level use that work just fine - the TD Centre for instance despite the fact that "towers in the park" is no longer fashionable and doesn't fit the unimaginative ( pardon the pun ) formula.
 
AndreaPalladio said:
There isn't a single building on Bay Street that takes up an entire block. Unless you're opposed to Old City Hall. Then again, it doesn't have a convenience store in it, so you probably are.
Click to expand...

Wow. I'm absolutely astonished. Do we live in the same city? Is this Bay Street in Richmond Hill or something that you're talking about?

All of the bank complexes are superblock developments. The Bay. Old City Hall. New City Hall. The Eaton Centre. College Park and its attached condos. 900 Bay provincial government complex. The Aria Condos. Manulife Centre. These are just some of the superblock developments on Bay.

US, I don't want condos with dry cleaners and Rabbas. It's you who is so obsessed with this development by your favourite architect, meaning that you feel that exclusive condos are the only conceivable use for this site. I try to compromise by suggesting that you can still have your beloved exclusive condos and liven the place up for non-residents too. You then dismiss that with bizarre anti-capitalist dogma.

The overwhelming majority of Torontonians would consider Queen west of University to be a much more pleasant and attractive street to walk down and enjoy than Bay Street which is an entirely uninviting pedestrian environment that relegates most actual people to the basements.

I like pretty buildings as much as the next person. I just want those pretty buildings to be designed with some consideration for the city around them.
 
But if we can't shop everywhere, what will we do to entertain ourselves? Listen to our Ipods? Chat on our cellphones? Check email on our blackberries? The people must not be allowed to be alone with their own thoughts, even for a minute. There must be artificial stimulation everywhere!
 
Unimaginative2, SeanTrans warned you but you took the bait. ;)

Try convincing AndreaPalladio that you were never arguing about the boardwalk (and such would exist in any event with any development on that site). Try convincing US that the problem with Bay Street is not the retail. I dare ya!!!
 
Don't be too hard on Pier 27's superblockness...I'm sure Clewes will add all sorts of innovative laneways to mimic random urban vibrancy.
 
unimaginative2 said:
Wow. I'm absolutely astonished. Do we live in the same city? Is this Bay Street in Richmond Hill or something that you're talking about?

All of the bank complexes are superblock developments. The Bay. Old City Hall. New City Hall. The Eaton Centre. College Park and its attached condos. 900 Bay provincial government complex. The Aria Condos. Manulife Centre. These are just some of the superblock developments on Bay.
Click to expand...

None of the bank complexes take up an entire block. The Eaton Centre is not on Bay. College Park is one corner of a block, and not on Bay. The Manulife is on Bloor, but I'll concede that. New City Hall is the greatest public space in the city, but again, there is only one small restaurant, and no shopping for you.
 
They are superblock developments. All of them. Please, please read the definition of that word before you post again. Of course, I'm sure you'll find a way to twist the definition to meet your purpose. The Eaton Centre development includes Bell Trinity and the Marriott. And what about the rest of them I mentioned? Stop arguing semantics and look at the big picture. Bay Street is a terrible street for anyone but archisnobs admiring the buildings, and it's a terrible street because of developments just like Pier 27.

US, please, it should go without saying but if you're going to disagree with me, argue what I'm actually saying rather than what you wish I was saying.
 
Superblock, noun: an area of city land larger than the usual block, treated according to a unified plan and generally closed to vehicular through traffic.

So other than City Hall and the Manulife, none of the buildings you describe falls within this definition. Unless, in determining what you define as a superblock, you just willy nilly add nearby buildings to shore up your point. Well then, I guess we should raze the Annex, because all those buildings close together take up an entire block. And no stores!!!

You might want to realize that the Greenwich Village Jane Jacobs wrote about, the Greenwich Village of the 1950s, is not going to reappear here. No matter how much you fantasize and fetishize it.
 
Yeah, so instead of trying to get as close to Greenwich Village as possible, we should emulate the most failed development models of the 50s and 60s, building upper class Cabrini Greens.

It's clear you want to distract from Pier 27 as much as possible, because even you may be coming to realize that there's no way to argue that this is a good and suitable development for a major urban site, other than a blind and religious love of its architect. Pier 27 is a superblock of the kind that we outgrew decades ago. It means that a single use, a single income will dominate three entire blocks of the city. Our waterfront revitalization was supposed to be about tying the waterfront to the city. This doesn't bring the urban grid to the waterfront. It perpetuates the anti-urban existing development pattern. The only possible benefit is a bit more money for the developer, a pretty building for postcards (and I mean, come on, this building's okay but it's no TD Centre or New City Hall), and more money for aA. Honestly, guys would support tearing down New or Old City Hall if it meant another commission for Peter Clewes?

Oh, and AP, where'd you get that definition? Did you get it somewhere reputable? Did you pull it out of your head and try to make it official with the italicized 'noun'?
 
The Random House Dictionary. My Concise Oxford doesn't have definition for it, and I'm too lazy to walk down the street to look it up in the OED.

How do you count 3 blocks for Pier 27. There are no blocks there. There never were. Do you just deem blocks in random places? It's not a single use, unless by some bizzare logic you count living, and walking, and running, and sailing, or heaven forbid! just sitting on a bench and relaxing as a single use. But I guess those are benefits you'd forgo for a Macs and a Blockbuster.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top