daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > Highrises

Highrises Discussions of projects under construction between 100-199m/300-649ft tall.
» Proposed Highrises



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 3rd, 2006, 07:41 PM   #181
algonquin
Registered User
 
algonquin's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Ontario
Posts: 3,010
Likes (Received): 22

I was walking down through Cityplace the other day, and there was a suprising amount of pedestrian traffic, even on Spadina.

I think cityplace is already an urban success, at the very least not a failure.
algonquin no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old May 3rd, 2006, 08:02 PM   #182
Taller, Better
Administrator
 
Taller, Better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 70,969
Likes (Received): 12195

Quote:
Originally Posted by Roch5220
Simple. It, from the surface, appears like a Miami style gated condo community, only with no physical gate (or water obstacle).

No one will be attracted to the area except for residents, hence most people will just drive through it, instead of being apart of the rest of downtown where people go to mingle/shop/be entertained. Such prime land, such a waste of use being so single purpose.

Why, then would people who don't live at Cityplace, would venture down there? What purpose would they have?
But it is NOT a gated community, is it Roch? I am mystified
why you are so insistent on that aspect. It is not sealed off from the
rest of the city like gated communities in other cities are.... people can drone on and on til Doomsday about how much more pleasant it will be
to wander down Queen Street than City Place, and they are correct. City
Place does not have 200 years of history, does not have cute old Victorian
buildings, and will have none of the charm of say, the Annex. It is a brand,
spanking new development. It will not have the old trees and landscaping of Rosedale. That is beside the point. Toronto is expanding at a rapid rate, and we WANT people to move downtown. What do we do with them when they get downtown? We build condominiums to fit them all in. This happens to be an area of high concentration, just like you will find in other large cities in the world, including New York City, and it will not be a detriment or a threat to the rest of downtown. If someone likes high density living, they will move here. If someone likes mixed useage they will move to any one of other downtown neighbourhoods. These units are all owned, not rented, so it will not become another Jamestown. This is just one part of the fabric of downtown, and in a sense it is a means to an end. We want the population to increase downtown, and this project is helping that. Again, I repeat, if ALL of downtown were like this, I would rebel. But it is not, and there is no indication that this project will spread to everywhere else. Yes there is going to be a similarity between
all the buildings. They are all going to look circa 2005. That happens during
building booms, and there is little that can be done to avoid it. Virtually everything going up in London now will look like it was built in the same decade. They might be different shaped buildings, but they will all look like
they are from the same period, just as PoMo buildings all look like they are
from the same era, regardless of shape. So be it. I have actually walked through this area and been impressed by the accessibility. Have you walked through it and found it to be like a gated community? I think some people are fearing the worst and not
seeing the advantages.
__________________
'Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood."
-architect Daniel Burnman
Taller, Better no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 08:14 PM   #183
Ed007Toronto
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2003
Location: Toronto
Posts: 834
Likes (Received): 71

Quote:
Why, then would people who don't live at Cityplace, would venture down there? What purpose would they have?
In the near future there will be a supermarket and liquor store in City Place. This will bring in people from the waterfront and as far north as Queen to shop here. That's one small reason. The school and park will be another.
Ed007Toronto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 08:29 PM   #184
Roch5220
My dog rules
 
Roch5220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, NYC
Posts: 1,663
Likes (Received): 10

Taller.Better: I said its like a gated community, not physically.

And you are missing the point. People have no reason to go to Cityplace. Queen st is quite obvious why people go there, chinatown, bloor & yonge, yonge & dundas, etc,. etc. are all attracted by either shopping or eating. While a gated community keeps people out, Cityplace won't need the gates as people will avoid going there, unless it gets them somewhere quicker.

The reason why I keep on referring to it as like a gated community, is that non-residents, although allowed to go into Cityplace, will not go there. Tourists for example, will go to the CBD, Queen St., maybe touch upon the matrix buildings/front street area as they make their way to the skydome/CN Tower. They may cut a path to Chinatown, and then visit other places, but place and simple, theres nothing attracting them to Cityplace. Cityplace is like a parking lot, while people may drive through it, park their, or whatever, and then walk from their car to get to the mall, people may use the streets of Cityplace to get somewhere else, and not being an actual destination.

Now why will people go to cityplace? Well, you can ask the same about why will people hang around the harbourfront area condos, like the WTC, the pedestrian traffic (which gets better when harbourfront area opens up during the summer) is very minimal, to the point when the retail also suffers. Theres no reason why people really need to be down there, although, the new maple square complex will probably help a lot.

The better planning would have been to open the place up, have a mixed used neighbourhoud throwing in some office. More constant traffic throughout the day (including during the work day) will help make the street level a lot better, as well as to help the retail.

What I think, on the retail level, is that they should try to attract/accomadate big retail chains like GAP, or Jacobs, etc. etc. They should have made the base retail units larger to accomadate such. I really think you can measure a street by its retail.

Last edited by Roch5220; May 3rd, 2006 at 08:35 PM.
Roch5220 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 08:44 PM   #185
Roch5220
My dog rules
 
Roch5220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, NYC
Posts: 1,663
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Ed007Toronto
In the near future there will be a supermarket and liquor store in City Place..
Maybe. I would also forsee people still driving to Loblaws and/or going to the one at maple leaf square.

It will help though if these supermarkets offer reasonably priced delivery services.
Roch5220 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 09:07 PM   #186
Taller, Better
Administrator
 
Taller, Better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 70,969
Likes (Received): 12195

This is primarily a residential area, not a tourist destination area, and I would be surprised if they do not develop street level commerical space.. that normally follows. Conversely, though... the thousands of incomers who live here will be a part of the life of tourist destination areas like Chinatown and Queen West. They will not spend every living moment in their condos. Perhaps the people buying these condos actually enjoy the 40 or 50 storey city views... maybe they aren't keen on townhouse living. Perhaps some are buying from cities like Hong Kong and are used to high density living, and actually prefer it. I would not want to live in City Place, as I quite enjoy living in an older, established neighbourhood. But, there are people who thrive on this type of dense living. A newly built mix of height and scale for housing is not always visually successful. Last weekend I took a little tour through King West, as far as King/Dufferin. There are many new mixed areas along there, and some are more successful than others. There are stretches of quite ghastly "Ye Olde Towne Homes" that made my blood curdle. You also see this type of Towne Home thing when you go out to The Beach/es, and it is not always pretty. Faux Victorian, when poorly done, is more frightening than a 50 storey highrise condo. When you walk through Manhattan or any other large city, and come across an area of dense population, no matter how posh, is there any particular reason to visit there unless you live there? Not really... I don't feel drawn to every single area of every city I visit. I can walk through Manhattan's West Side and glance down side streets that are hugely built up, and feel no desire to wander off into these areas. They are older and more established than CityPlace, but the idea is the same. Some areas are built for different reasons than others.
My point is, there is room for a densely populated community like this in Toronto. It may not be what I would choose, or what you would choose, but quite obviously a lot of people are choosing it. Is it harming anything to have an area that is not of mixed scale? I don't think so.
__________________
'Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood."
-architect Daniel Burnman
Taller, Better no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 09:29 PM   #187
Tallinn to Toronto
BANNED
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 135
Likes (Received): 0

Cityplace looks like it was planned by a child playing Sim City. it's a bunch of buildings, clumsily thrown together, none of which are attractice. it simply (judging by the plans) has no flow. it is ugly. is it better than a driving range? no. could the land have been used more appropriately? yes.

ick. st. james town of the future. guaranteed.
Tallinn to Toronto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 09:44 PM   #188
cassius
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2003
Posts: 384
Likes (Received): 2

Here's a few updates of CityPlace taken yesterday evening.















cassius no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 09:58 PM   #189
Taller, Better
Administrator
 
Taller, Better's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 70,969
Likes (Received): 12195

Quote:
Originally Posted by Tallinn to Toronto
Cityplace looks like it was planned by a child playing Sim City. it's a bunch of buildings, clumsily thrown together, none of which are attractice. it simply (judging by the plans) has no flow. it is ugly. is it better than a driving range? no. could the land have been used more appropriately? yes.

ick. st. james town of the future. guaranteed.
Your elegant and thoughtful critique has completely won me over.
CityPlace is doomed to complete and utter failure, and will become
a high rise slum in no time. Perhaps we should save time and just
bulldoze the whole thing right now and rebuild the driving range.
It is remarkable how similar your views are to RealEstateJunkie.
Thank you for setting me straight on this issue.
__________________
'Make no little plans. They have no magic to stir men's blood."
-architect Daniel Burnman

Last edited by Taller, Better; May 3rd, 2006 at 10:12 PM.
Taller, Better no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 10:58 PM   #190
Roch5220
My dog rules
 
Roch5220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, NYC
Posts: 1,663
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taller, Better
This is primarily a residential area, not a tourist destination area, and I would be surprised if they do not develop street level commerical space.. that normally follows. .
Wait a second. You were questioning how people thought that cityplace would segregate itself from downtown, I think you just answered your own question. It is a strictly a residential area. Hence unlike other downtown areas that are more mixed use, you think that the avg non-cityplace-resident will make use of the area?

Also, you just can't create the commercial space. This has already been created in the base of the buildings, which are quite small.

Your point that there is a need for high density living, was not the point that you were portraying before. There is plenty of high density areas in Toronto, however, there is some land that is obviously prized more than others.
Roch5220 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 11:04 PM   #191
Roch5220
My dog rules
 
Roch5220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, NYC
Posts: 1,663
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taller, Better
CityPlace is doomed to complete and utter failure, and will become
a high rise slum in no time. .
I agree with your sarcasim. It will be a nice neighbourhood to live - my issues are strictly planning/land use wise. Other than that like I stated in one of my earlier posts, it makes the skyline look expanded, and is quite a massive and impressive complex, planning issues aside. I'm sure the resale values of these units will greatly increase over time.
Roch5220 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 11:18 PM   #192
thryve
°°°°°°°°°°
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,346
Likes (Received): 22

Guys, this is how it is...

The land would have stayed undeveloped unless a single corporation like Concord came along and decided to create a monotonous development- it's not anyone's first choice to have it developed monotonously, as it's nice to have a big mix of different developments mashed together and not one large, single development,but come on, just be glad that something is being done with that empty land

The area will be better over time as it develops West... they have changed the plans from their original plans, with newer buildings being better incorporated and better designed to suit downtown Toronto

Last edited by thryve; December 17th, 2006 at 08:05 PM.
thryve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 3rd, 2006, 11:54 PM   #193
Roch5220
My dog rules
 
Roch5220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, NYC
Posts: 1,663
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by thryve
Guys, this is how it is...

-The land would have stayed undeveloped unless a single corporation like Concord came along and decided to create a monotonous development-
I've heard that argument before, and I don't necessarily think its a bad thing. The Cityplace development is taking a big share of the condo market, which would have been supplied by others throughout the city. Granted, you wouldn't have it all concentrated in one area.
Roch5220 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 4th, 2006, 12:22 AM   #194
thryve
°°°°°°°°°°
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,346
Likes (Received): 22

It'd be nice if they atleast left open spaces within the development so we could have a mix of architecture... but that just doesn't happen. haha

-thryve
thryve no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 8th, 2006, 06:39 AM   #195
InTheBeach
Indie Bean
 
InTheBeach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Beach
Posts: 2,636
Likes (Received): 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by Taller, Better
These units are all owned, not rented, so it will not become another Jamestown.
Some of the high-rises at Vic Park and Danforth are condos. Might be the best deal in down.

I appreciate your sentiments, and strongly agree that the development is good for population density downtown. But this is something that could have been so much better like Liberty Village, or West Donlands (maybe) to name a couple alternatives. These are projects that provide similar densities, use up consolidated swaths of land, and are done in a style that is consistent with how the bulk of "the city" has been planned.

Cheers!
InTheBeach no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2006, 10:34 PM   #196
ratoronto
Registered User
 
ratoronto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Toronto
Posts: 320
Likes (Received): 0

the parks, greenspace, vibrancy, street-level retail and restaurants will come with time... once the buildings are built and residents are living in them the services will quickly arrive to serve them. In 20 years Cityplace will be one of the most compact, green, and desirable neighbourhoods in Toronto.
ratoronto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 10th, 2006, 10:41 PM   #197
InTheBeach
Indie Bean
 
InTheBeach's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: The Beach
Posts: 2,636
Likes (Received): 24

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratoronto
the parks, greenspace, vibrancy, street-level retail and restaurants will come with time... once the buildings are built and residents are living in them the services will quickly arrive to serve them. In 20 years Cityplace will be one of the most compact, green, and desirable neighbourhoods in Toronto.


Right. There are whole sections of town that this logic could apply to, and we have seen that this is not the case.

But I'll have what you're having.
InTheBeach no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2006, 02:46 AM   #198
Bertez
Registered User
 
Bertez's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Sauga
Posts: 2,203
Likes (Received): 6

HVE looks better when it is surrounded by it's other Cityplace brothers and sisters......
__________________
........
Bertez no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2006, 04:50 AM   #199
LordMandeep
Registered User
 
LordMandeep's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2006
Location: Brampton(outside Toronto)
Posts: 1,918
Likes (Received): 12

i like how the glass is on montage
__________________
Live in Suburbia. Save me!!!
LordMandeep no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 11th, 2006, 03:11 PM   #200
Roch5220
My dog rules
 
Roch5220's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2003
Location: Toronto, NYC
Posts: 1,663
Likes (Received): 10

Quote:
Originally Posted by ratoronto
the parks, greenspace, vibrancy, street-level retail and restaurants will come with time... .
Like the waterfront condos right? All sarcasim aside, where do you think this retail/rest. will locate? Judging by the size of most of the street level retail, the individual units are too small, just the size probably for a convience store, or drycleaners, etc. I wouldn't count on retail/restaurants except for the odd coffee shop/deli since you can't rebuild the base of the buildings. If they really did want to cater to say restaurants, a better idea would have been for mixed use buildings, where the base is say office, and the tower is residential. I'm sure the lower level condo owners are happy their are no hopping and loud restaurant/bars located a floor or 2 below them.
Roch5220 no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
cityplace, cityplace development, toronto

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 06:04 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu