www.thestar.com
plug paywalled links into the bottom address bar: https://archive.is/
Better be quick on the Copy & Paste though, the page redirects.
Just don't close any of the pop-up windows and you should be able to grab it. It usually redirects when you close them.
True that it's attractive from the exterior, but I thinks the diagrid would disrupt the view from too many units. Not every buyer appreciates that aesthetic.Unpopular opinion: this does not meet expectations. Looks much nicer up close though. From afar, the Christmas tree hangers are a downgrade from the diagrid that was originally proposed. I wanted to withhold my opinion until much of the cladding was complete and now that it is and you can see the tower's form and materials, I'm just not sold. It's rather boring and a downgrade from the ambition that was initially expressed.
The diagrid in a photo from @Marcanadian in 2015:
Once up close, you can see the high quality of materials and I'm sure the street presence will be fantastic but on the skyline, it just doesn't measure up to the expectations of a Sir Norman Foster that took a decade to build.
I always right click on the link to the page (either on this forum/reddit post/etc) or the star's main page then copy link address.
Not to mention that had that been the chosen design, it would’ve cost even more. Given the goings-on with Mizrahi & partners, the project would’ve grounded to a halt sooner than it did, probably early enough to be scrapped altogether.
Essentially, the earlier plan for the building proved to not be financially viable, hence the receivership. When a new developer takes over, it's par for the course for previous contracts to be cancelled, as the new developer typically looks for ways to make completing the building make financial sense.
Wrong but sadly legal.