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

Balconies are mostly ornamentation, so they're not appropriate for a lot of modernist buildings. The new buildings you provide as examples work because they incorporate the balconies as ornamentation. It's not as though you ever see anybody sitting out on one ...
 
My close friends who live in apartments or condos that have balconies or terraces use them to fairly often, most of them use their spaces frequently from spring through fall so that's the only gauge I have. I don't buy for one minute that balconies are mostly ornamentation, if that was the case we'd see a whole lot of buildings with no balconies which would save a lot of money for the developers. Builders have been adding balconies and terraces to multi-storey dwellings for well over a hundred years in North America, so someone must be using and demanding them - and not for ornamentation.
 
I live in a condo and we use our balcony regularly and frequently. They are not ornamentation, even if the inhabitatns choose not to sit on them very often. I reiterate: balconies are there for the enjoyment of those who purchase or rent units and the aesthetic judgments of passersby are of little importance. To the poster who used the word ostentatious, I can only guess as to what you think is ostentatious about them... keeping your Rembrandt in a gold frame where everybody can see it out there on the balcony, perhaps? But most folks keep some deck charis, a table and perhaps some plants there. (We grow herbs in a basket.) The are not particularly ornamental but they are useful.

I also can think of no rational justification for putting a height limit of balconies. I suppose in certain very windy locales, a builder might choose not to include them after a certain point, but that is scarcely a matter for public policy. Nor, I think, does it actually apply in Toronto.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
A newer and exciting way of dealing with balconies that we are starting to see is by making the balconies an important feature of the building (see the Market Wharf tower, Casa, One Bloor, Massey Tower etc.). I rarely find balconies on buildings to be unpleasant but what's happening with some of our better buildings here is how Architects are willing to play with these spaces that many people desire and make them less visible to the eye or as a part of the building to further enhance - or in some cases, completely define a building.
Click to expand...

I agree - we've moved on from the apologetic '80s and '90s when balconies were tucked inside the building and turned into solariums as if they were something shameful. Now they're out of the closet big time, and part of the rather fun re-ordering of things that's going on.
 
Gosh, well put - recessed balconies with concrete railings must reflect some self-loathing part of the architects mind.

I likewise think there is plenty of reason to embrace these slim projections into the air, as long as they're pretty.
 
The Design Review Panel voted for a redesign of this proposal:

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/2012/agendas/pdf/drp_minutes_17jul12.pdf

Main points:

Site Plan Design

Reduce proposed density and height to help create a more livable environment. Increase building setback along Yonge and Grenville, adding more space for pedestrians and trees. Design Luke Lane as an urban, pedestrian-first environment.

Pedestrian Realm
- Increase quantity and quality of pedestrian realm.

Built Form and Articulation
- Develop a design strategy that visually connects tower and podium, creating calm and simplicity

Podium
- visually differentiate between office and residential entries
- recess the office main entry creating a “reveal” condition between the existing Odd Fellows building and the new façade to the north
- simplify podium elevations and reduce the number of individual façade expressions
- align new with existing Odd Fellows building as precedent in terms of datum lines, materiality, etc
- scale down and simplify canopies
- create visual difference between Yonge (main street) and Grenville (side street) elevations

Tower
- reduce tower height and increase distance from adjacent tower to west.
- rethink balcony and tower cap strategy to simplify tower expression, and create visual connection with podium.

Building Composition
- Disconnect between historicist base and curvilinear tower
- architectural relationship between tower and base needs greater cohesion/connection
- curvilinear balcony design doesn’t relate well to rectilinear tower

Base
- The impulse to relate to heritage building is understood, but historical pastiche is troubling
- Duplication of facades (on Yonge St and Grenville St) is also troubling
- Base should be a complimentary, quality, memorable, contemporary design
- Size of Office lobby may be too large
- consider reduction in size to assist with street animation
- Increase relationship of residential lobby with neighbouring building (opp. St. Luke Lane).

Protruding canopies
- Hesitant to support canopies without understanding their greater impact on Yonge Street
- Sense that this greater impact may be inappropriate for Yonge Street
- Instead, prefer to see wider sidewalk (increased setback) and consistent street trees
 
So another development on the chopping block.......i hope city planning isnt recomending 48-52 storeys, for all future builds up Yonge street.
How boring.....seems like another Entertainment District in the works
 
Automation Gallery said:
So another development on the chopping block.......i hope city planning isnt recomending 48-52 storeys, for all future builds up Yonge street.
How boring.....seems like another Entertainment District in the works
Click to expand...


"chopping block"?? ummmmm no. this will get approved. and at 50+ storeys to boot. write it down.
 
Hopefully G+C will realize how butt-fugly this design was and will try to do something better but I'm not holding my breath.
 
This is a big shock. The planning dept strikes again. They will be busy gutting the Mirvish and casino proposals soon.
 
Automation Gallery said:
So another development on the chopping block....
Click to expand...

Another decent building succumbs to the 'Design Dumb Down Panel'. Wider sidewalks are nice, but are they going to move the building on the corner? There's little point in enforcing that unless the whole block has a uniformly wide sidewalk.

Simplify tower expression? Why so we can end up with something they personally like? Reduce density and height to create more livability? I suppose this is defined by these people's personal ideas about what is livable.

I'm just flabbergasted that a small group of people get to dictate to an entire city what designs we get to enjoy. These people have far too much control over the process and their power needs to be severely curtailed.
 
Last edited:
isaidso said:
Another decent building succumbs to the 'Design Dumb Down Panel'. Wider sidewalks are nice, but are they going to move the building on the corner? There's little point in enforcing that unless the whole block has a uniformly wide sidewalk.

Simplify tower expression? Why so we can end up with something they personally like? Reduce density and height to create more livability? I suppose this is defined by these people's personal ideas about what is livable.

I'm just flabbergasted that a small group of people get to dictate to an entire city what designs we get to enjoy. These people have far too much control over the process and their power needs to be severely curtailed.
Click to expand...

Did you actually look at the image included in the pdf? The design is awful. I think your overeagerness for more development drives blind to the fact that certain designs must be improved (and this one isn't innovative to begin with, simply copying the lines of One Bloor), especially on major streets like Yonge.

And these people on the 'Design Dumb Down Panel' are:

Gordon Stratford (Chair): Architect, Senior Vice President, Design Director - HOK Canada
Michael Leckman (Vice Chair): Architect, Principal - Diamond and Schmitt
Robert Allsopp: Landscape Architect, Planner, Architect, Principal - du Toit Allsopp Hillier
Shirley Blumberg: Architect, Principal – KPMB
Calvin Brook: Planner, Architect, Principal - Brook McIlroy
Ralph Giannone: Architect, Principal - Giannone Associates
Charles Hazell: Heritage Specialist, Architect, Principal - Taylor Hazell Architects
Alun Lloyd: Transportation Engineer, Principal - BA Group
Jim Melvin: Landscape Architect, Principal - PMA Landscape Architects Ltd.
Roland rom Colthoff: Architect, Director – RAW Design
David Sisam: Architect, Principal – Montgomery Sisam Architects
Eric Turcotte: Planner, Architect, Senior Associate - Urban Strategies
Sibylle von Knobloch: Landscape Architect, Principle - NAK Design

Sure sound like people who don't know their stuff!
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top