DavidCapizzano said:
wrong
Click to expand...
The scale of the micro retail is intimate enough that a sign, a pot of flowers, an awning and a table and chairs will dominate a pedestrians field of view. It's a mistake to value a buildings aesthetics over how it actually functions. There are countless examples of vibrant, beautiful spaces in ugly buildings and vice versa. Obviously it's ideal to have both. In this case the interior laneway has more variety in materials than the outside, and has a density of units that promotes good urbanism and ground level creativity from the tenants. A difference in materials doesn't change that last part.

On the same note, the Bloor frontage would be more improved by restricting each retail unit to the demise line than it would be if all the materials were better.

Case and point is an old Bloor street example.

Screen Shot 2025-03-25 at 2.31.53 PM.png
 
If we compare Esplanade Cartier project in Montreal to MV, Esplanade Cartier is just simply bigger. Obviously I don't know if the MV's architects would have create more diverse looking building given a bigger space (one would hope).

What I hope would happen is Toronto adopt more of the Shared Space / Neighborhood concept - where the subsequent plan neighborhoods create continuity and share amenities with each other. So if another MV size neighborhood being built beside MV, we can continue the micro-retail experience and also have some diversity in building design as well.

Again, one can hope.
 
Ward8 said:
It's a mistake to value a buildings aesthetics over how it actually functions. There are countless examples of vibrant, beautiful spaces in ugly buildings and vice versa
Click to expand...
What????? By this logic you could call every soulless, unpleasant suburban plaza a success.
 
T3G said:
What????? By this logic you could call every soulless, unpleasant suburban plaza a success.
Click to expand...

I totally agree that statement! I'm continually fascinated by how some places work (even when they shouldn't) and how some don't and the reasons why that is.

For example, I think this building on Queen East functions a lot better than it looks:
sample-003.jpg


Streets have energy and you don't just look at a street, you feel a street. Because streets have a natural energy, I think a good streetscape responds to that energy and channels it. A lot of attractive, minimalist facades fail because there's no interaction, they just reflect.

But I don't think Mirvish can be fully assessed until it's done, in the year 2048.
 
T3G said:
What????? By this logic you could call every soulless, unpleasant suburban plaza a success.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how you've drawn that conclusion from what I wrote. A suburban plaza is a great way to illustrate my point though. If you improved the aesthetics and materiality of the average suburban plaza you don't end up with a better experience because the way the building works is fundamentally broken.
 
Towered said:
Alternative Thinking is gone???
Click to expand...
Appears so. 😕

Regarding the holdouts, they look more geometrically harmonious with the rest of the block when viewing the full picture, as the two older bits bookend the newer bit. I quite like this little stretch and I'm sure some tenants are happy to have more windows (and south-facing at that!)
1000030974.jpg

1000030964.jpg
 
Is the college on the hook for rent until they find someone to take over? Not sure how retail leasing works. And now without this anchor I wonder if businesses looking to serve the student community will change their mind about taking on a retail unit here. The remaining "anchors" are BMO and LCBO. And Bestco if that ever opens lol...
 
It's a shame that the Bathurst frontage of this project looks so much more harmonious, organic and hospitable than the Bloor frontage. A bit of a swing-and-a-miss for Westbank in my opinion.

Can't recreate that small scale fine grade goodness these days!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top