[HelloToday]

Haha @ the comments.

I like the design and location of the building. The floorplans not so much.

 

[EnviroTO]

The podium looks great and that is what is most important since most people don't walk around looking up. The tower itself looks like Simcoe Place without the nice glass and with the USB ports mentioned above.

 

[Ramako]

So do we have an actual height for this tower yet?

 

[LowPolygon]

The podium looks great and that is what is most important since most people don't walk around looking up. The tower itself looks like Simcoe Place without the nice glass and with the USB ports mentioned above.

not quite sure about that logic. if that was true, why would anyone bother with this:

in other words, what's a skyline for?

the point is: the experience of the city at street level is only one aspect of our perception of the urban environment. an important one no doubt, but hardly definitive.

details count, design counts, materials count, creative intelligence counts--no matter what floor they are on, or whether you can "see them from the street".

which is why one should aggressively oppose awful buildings like this one.

 

[gristle]

not quite sure about that logic. if that was true, why would anyone bother with this:

The question that must follow is whether you see things from such a vantage point every day? For most people, it's at the street level where they encounter the city.


And that's not argument against skylines.

 

[Ramako]

The question that must follow is whether you see things from such a vantage point every day? For most people, it's at the street level where they encounter the city.


And that's not argument against skylines.

In this particular case, given that almost nobody has any reason to ever walk down this stretch of Temperance Street, I think that for most people it's the tower portion of this project that will be seen and experienced the most, which is unfortunate.

 

[gristle]

The hope would be for this building and other development to create a reason for people to walk by there.

 

[Ramako]

The hope would be for this building and other development to create a reason for people to walk by there.

I think that will be more a function of the quality of retail at ground level than the architecture. Good design and materials aren't going to be enough for the average person to detour through Temperance, which is unfortunate.

 

[gristle]

I agree with what you are saying. Creating an inviting street-level environment is always a long-term plus for the city. That success is only amplified by the addition of attractions like retail, restaurants and services. Given the number of office buildings, hotels and growing number of residences in the area, improvements in the street-level attractions could easily sustain an increase in pedestrian traffic.

 

[Urban Shocker]

great! a building that looks like a USB hub. this is one site that just can't catch a break.

It reminds me of a Canadian Tire power bar. Given the demographic they're plugging into this thing, perhaps they'll have a bar there of that name.

 

[Mr.Tang]

What is to be done with the heritage property at the corner of the street?

 

[condovo]

It reminds me of a Canadian Tire power bar. Given the demographic they're plugging into this thing, perhaps they'll have a bar there of that name.

Heaven for shame they're not the Occupy Toronto crowd.

 

[4grand]

not quite sure about that logic. if that was true, why would anyone bother with this:



in other words, what's a skyline for?

the point is: the experience of the city at street level is only one aspect of our perception of the urban environment. an important one no doubt, but hardly definitive.

details count, design counts, materials count, creative intelligence counts--no matter what floor they are on, or whether you can "see them from the street".

which is why one should aggressively oppose awful buildings like this one.

FINALLY! Someone with some aesthetic intrepidity!

I like the way this tower meets the heritage podium.. quite snappy...

HOWEVER

Why, why god why, is there yet another right-angled, rectangle building being built in this city of monoliths?

Why are squares and rectangles the only shapes that seem to show up in Toronto buildings?

Rectangle accents to somehow add depth to an already rectangular building?

Have people forgotten about circles, triangles, pentagons, etc.?

While I don't mind the roof and the setbacks, that's not saying much considering that's it's really only just an improvement on the mechanical stumps that end up on Toronto buildings (X Condo).

 

[Oliver Tweed]

Why are squares and rectangles the only shapes that seem to show up in Toronto buildings?

A: Because they are the most economical to build. On the most basic level all rooms are boxes, no matter whether they be residential, commercial or otherwise. Not surprising that when you group a whole bunch of them together and stack them on top of each other, you get a bigger box.

Take a look at the trailer for the documentary about building the Absolute towers in Mississauga to see just how much more complex (and expensive) a project becomes when you start adding curves, ever-changing floorplans and the like. I'm guessing most developers aren't willing to take that added risk when simply building a tower of that size is a significant risk unto itself.

 

[4grand]

^What about a triangular roof, setbacks and detail? And I think most buildings have square rooms, but I wouldn't say most buildings are just right-angled boxes because of that. The room I'm in right now is square, but my apartment building isn't a right-angled block.