Toronto YC Condos -- Yonge at College | 198.42m | 62s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

Drill and crane.

attachment.php
 

Attachments

  • image.jpg
    image.jpg
    1.1 MB · Views: 5,752
So the leak on the TTC this morning was 'north of College station'. Any thoughts on whether it could be related to the works in the photo above?
 
interchange42 said:
If it's the materials you're not happy about, (could it be overuse of glass spandrels and aluminum mullions?), the City has no power to stop those materials from being used. The City has enacted a new bylaw which stipulates a 60-40 opaque-transparent exterior for buildings as they can make a legal case for increasing the energy efficiency of building envelops, but the City does not have the power to say "the 60 percent opaque portion must all be limestone or brick". If it's the black and white tinted balcony glazing you're not happy about, then you're completely in the un-legislated territory of taste which the market is supposed to take care of.
Click to expand...

This is exactly it; the material. The city could just as easily make a case for demanding a certain percentage of vision glass be curtain wall - the argument for that decision being for the sake of energy efficiency is no different than it was for the arbitrary 60-40 bylaw. (and by arbitrary, I'm referring to the specific ratio.)

In regards to The One, if KWT actually is "hell bent on delaying" it, (no doubt she would disagree with the way you have characterized her stance), then it's not because of The One's architectural qualities which she cannot control, but because of planning concerns that she can. Both she and the mayor have said The One has to go through the planning process like everyone else, something that has only come up because of the haste with which Stollerys' stone façade was dismantled. Sure Mizrahi had the demolition permits, but were people on the sidewalks properly protected when the demolition team initially went in with crowbars? It didn't look like it…
Click to expand...

Going on stage, as a public figure, saying that you will do everything in your power to delay a project (one that many view as one of the best proposals this city has had in a while) is not good publicity, no matter how you phrase it. Remember, this is the same councillor that was famous for vehemently opposing the replacement of a parking garage in Yorkville. Not only does she come off as anti-progress, but she comes off as a bureaucratic bully. Essentially, using her powers to justify her own motives, and not to improve the city. Speaking of improving the city, the mayor and KWT are absolutely wrong in publicly declaring that The One has to go through the planning process "like everyone else" - obviously, that is implied. It just leaves the impression that the city is making it more difficult for bolder projects to pass planning hurdles, when we should be opening every door for projects like this (obviously, while still following the planning process). As it stands, developers see bold projects as a bad investment. Why plan something like the One or Gehry-Mirvish when you can build CASA 10 times over without a peep from city hall? We need to incentivize architecture in the city - if we can't have specific bylaws that encourage good architecture, we need to show developers that they will be given more leniency when they actually put some effort in designing buildings that add to the city. Maybe, just maybe, we'll breed developers with some municipal pride as a result.
 
Last edited:
DtTO said:
This is exactly it; the material. The city could just as easily make a case for demanding a certain percentage of vision glass be curtain wall - the argument for that decision being for the sake of energy efficiency is no different than it was for the arbitrary 60-40 bylaw. (and by arbitrary, I'm referring to the specific ratio.)
Click to expand...

Ideally the bylaw would be based on the building's R-value and not on anything as irrelevant as vision/opaque or curtainwall/windowwall. There's incredibly cheap curtainwall out there that would underperform a well-designed windowwall.
 
From yesterday:

DSC00275.jpg


42
 

Attachments

  • DSC00275.jpg
    DSC00275.jpg
    253 KB · Views: 2,199
Something tells me that hotel isn't long for this world....

I also feel that next to the folks at ERA/Quadrangle, I probably know more about that fire tower clock than anyone in Toronto: been studying it the past 2 weeks for my latest fantasy rendering. Thanks for that great angle looking at the roof details I needed!
 
DtTO said:
It just leaves the impression that the city is making it more difficult for bolder projects to pass planning hurdles, when we should be opening every door for projects like this (obviously, while still following the planning process). As it stands, developers see bold projects as a bad investment. Why plan something like the One or Gehry-Mirvish when you can build CASA 10 times over without a peep from city hall? We need to incentivize architecture in the city - if we can't have specific bylaws that encourage good architecture, we need to show developers that they will be given more leniency when they actually put some effort in designing buildings that add to the city. Maybe, just maybe, we'll breed developers with some municipal pride as a result.
Click to expand...

Very well said. It would be hard to decide in practice what defines a building worth incentivizing but i wish it happened more often. Far too often bold projects are watered down several times before actual construction starts.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top