Javascript is required to view this map.

Zip at Battery Park

In order to vote or change a previous
vote please Login/Register:


Monarch Corporation

Graziani + Corazza Architects Inc.

Nak Group of Companies

Monarch Corporation


Located in Liberty Village, Zip is the second of the three-phased project, Battery Park. The building is comprised of a 24 storey tower resting on a 6 storey podium. The podium is composed of a framework of masonry + glass that houses a mix of retail, recreation + residential components. The materials used are similar to the first phase, Battery Park, in order to provide a continuous visual and aesthetic continuation between the projects. Along the South face, the retail component of the first phase is severed to provide a sense of permeability to the podium. This void provides a pedestrian link to the landscaped courtyard internal to the development. This courtyard also serves as an extension of the recreational component located at the ground floor. Above the opening at grade, the developments are physically linked with a 2 storey pedestrian bridge. This transparent element allows for the programmatic functions of the development to take place while providing visual links from the internal courtyard to the surrounding green spaces. The tower component is set back from the podium and rises to 24 storeys in height. Glass is used to accentuate the sense of lightness to the tower and a grid work of balconies project from this glass box. Additional elements of metal panel vertically link the tower to both the podium + mechanical roof. The tower is comprised of a linear and shallow floor plate that houses a unit mix of wide shallow unit plans. This floor plate allows for a more expansive use of glass in the suites and results in a slender tower mass.


I happened to live in the area, and experienced what a bad project like this can do to the overall quality of the neighbourhood. This building destroyed the scale of the area, and did not give anything back in return. Some buildings have portions that are good, for example nice design at grade level, nice landscape features, nice use of materials, etc. This one is an absolute disaster.

I too found that a number of buildings were not to my liking and yet I didn't hate them. Hard to remain objective when only being able to utilize three choices of love, like or hate. There were certain aspects I liked regarding these buildings but then there were other architectural elements on the same buildings which I did not. I noticed a few developers who I was looking forward to seeing but not entered in the PUG awards this year as of course as their buildings are still undergoing construction/development.

Just a general comment; i find the three choices somewhat meaningless. I am treating the two extremes love/hate as choices, and wish to strongly assert that "like" it refers to bland indifference! At least 5 choices would be better:
"Good Architecture" = of course i love it as such is so rare, a good place to be! ;
"Not Bad" = some design influence/effort is apparent in some aspects of the building;
"Bland Neutrality" = the usual lack of thought and professional content is apparent;
"Meets Expectations" = what one generally expects, either a bizarre attempt at some historic
reference, or a demonstration of a lack of creativity or understanding of design;
"a Pug" = the worst of the worst, a blight on the landscape, and insult to the users.



I love these names..... this building is terrible. Another blight on the landscape.. looks like it was designed by the same person who did the Gerrard Square Mall in Riverdale. Yup... The Zip.. just zip it up and hide it away !

Hmm. Wish I'd thought of that sooner SusanSwitzer. Better late than never though, so I think I'll change my vote to a pass on this one. Maybe UnoMarcus' suggestion could be brought into play next year. This being said, there are still a number of satisfying designs that I just have to love. Thanks.

So many of the buildings look much the same as stuff put up 25 years ago. Big, tall pieces of rectangular glass. It would be nice to see some innovation. And while I'm at it, could we ever get rid of all those ugly wires draped over every street...we look like some town from the wild west 100 years ago.

Shame there's not an "indifferent" option.

peach-pink brick and green glass? can we please stop these from going up? please for the love of god? can't express my displeasure strongly enough for this aesthetic, which looks cheap and tired whether up close or from afar. barf on the cityscape.

The Pug Awards gratefully acknowledges the support of our Platinum Sponsors for their commitment to enhancing Toronto's cityscape through the promotion of innovative architecture and design. Through their advocacy of the Pug Ed youth education program, our Members' have given our city and its students an opportunity to think critically about urban environments and sparked community engagement that will resonate for generations to come. Thank you.
Pug Awards Inc. Charitable Registration no. 81189 9426 RR0001. Web Design & Development by ninth+crux