If high-rise towers are building for the future, what kind of future are we building?
By Ben Bull
Published October 20, 2006
I've got my head in the clouds. Ever since joining the ranks of RTH and becoming their Accidental Activist I've been soaking up the architectural insights of Messrs Leach, McGreal and Shaw. As a result, I've been able to take a long, hard, and relatively informed look at the world around me.
For some reason, recently, I've been looking up at Toronto's towers and asking myself, "What place do they have in our urban fabric?" and "Why do I hate them?"
I'm surrounded by towers. Ever since moving to Toronto's Esplanade neighbourhood, on the wrong side of the waterfront condos, just a ten minute walk from the Bay Street skyscrapers, I've been feeling small.
It's not the first time I've thought of towers.
A few issues ago RTH's Jason Leach called for a "major shakeup of our [Hamilton's] skyline."
"Hamilton needs a new signature tower," he wrote.
I wasn't so sure.
A few years before that I attended a presentation by Ontario Nature at the Hamilton Public library. The talk was about how to build density and vibrancy into our neighbourhoods. The speaker recounted the example of an unpopular condo development in Toronto's Yonge and Eglinton district. Apparently this was one of the first towers to go up in the neighbourhood and the councillor who pushed for it subsequently lost his seat at the next election.
"He took the fall for his foresight," explained the presenter.
Talk of infill today and thoughts of five, ten, and 50 storey condos going up down the street typically brings howls of derision from the NIMBY neighbours.
Who can blame them?
Take a look at all the new towers in Toronto's newest urban infills. A short drive west along the Gardiner, from Islington to Broadview, features fistfuls of 'fingers of progress' reaching for the sky, waving to greet you and blocking the view. Some of the newer high-rises in TO - at High Park south, and Lakeshore and Jameson (planned for 2007) look hideously out of place next to their low-rise neighbours.
Condo developers might argue that we need to "build for the future" - just look at all those Towers at Yonge and Eg right now - but, again, I'm not so sure. If this is building for the future, what kind of future are we building?
I'm not the only one with doubts. One of the hot issues in the upcoming Pickering municipal election is the proposal to throw up a 140 unit blob at Bay Ridges Plaza. Back in Toronto a recent waterfront makeover along Queens Quay prompted the waterfront redesign committee to reflect on the "virtual gated community" effect that tall residential buildings create: "Once condo residents go past the front desk," they explained, "they leave the neighbourhood behind."
Another architect, Toronto's David Peterson, commented in a recent Star article that residential towers are an "almost lazy approach to making housing," especially when compared to more imaginative low rise developments.
The idea that all new development should be "in keeping with the area" is not new. In some of the smaller towns in England new structures are subject to all manner of height, type and architectural design specifications - in some cases right down to the slate on the roof. Thus the argument that a 50 story building on a three story street is inappropriate seems pretty reasonable to me.
I have never experienced condo living for any length of time, but a friend of mine recently bought, and then sold, a Queens Quay condo.
"I hated it," he told me. "There was nothing to do, no people, no services - no nothing."
High-rises are a fact of life in Toronto and, as Hamilton starts to face up to its infill obligations, I expect we will see more going up there too. While I've no doubt there is a place - and a case - for high-rises, I just don't know what it is.
You must be logged in to comment.