ProjectEnd
Superstar
If you think Kirkor could do the Hotel Zaandam, I don't know what you're smoking...
|
|
|
- Thread starter AlbertC
- Start date
Northern Light
Superstar
I think hotel is unattractive and too busy.
Doubtless the skill to involved in utilizing that particular set of detail/cladding exceeds the design skill of KirKor, but that doesn't make it any less unappealing.
It's a jumble.
rbt
Senior Member
Tourist district Amsterdam.
They also have lots of 4 floor apartments with abundant parking that would have fit in fairly well in Regent Park 20 years ago. The roadway structure is what really differentiates the bulk of Amsterdam from mid-rise Toronto.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
That's the point
Northern Light
Superstar
I'm aware, I've been, more than once.
I quite like that architecture though; and it is what I associate w/Amsterdam along w/the canals.
While I like the trees and the scale in the above, I find the architecture rather sad, very dull colour palate and just mediocre quality, along with being a tad generic.
Towered
Superstar
Is...that a real building, or photoshop??Sign me up! (Toronto developers could never)
rbt
Senior Member
That was my point. 95% of Amsterdam architecture isn't particularly unique or inspiring. Amsterdam-inspired, without the highly selective rose glasses, would be a downgrade from what Toronto typically gets.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Towered
Superstar
Wow! As silly and ridiculous that it looks, I kind of love it and feel a bit weird for loving it. The overt whimsy is appealing!
ProjectEnd
Superstar
It's fantastic. The world needs way more 'fun' buildings. We have enough decorated sheds, let's start pumping out those ducks!
Towered
Superstar
But FUN architecture is "too expensive"!
Undulated
New Member
It appears these lands have been acquired by the City for a new park.
Northern Light
Superstar
What a terrible site for a park!
Depending on whether this deal includes the rear properties, it's somewhere between 0.06ha and 0.11ha, in other words, tiny, and at most usable as un-programmed green space, or maybe a very small playground, but even that is tight.
I looked it over and it's not an easily expandable site, you would need to remove the laneway to go west, which means building a new exit for it on the north end of the site, and on Vaughan you can only go a couple of properties before running into lots of low-rise apartment buildings just big enough to trigger replacement rental needs.
No forethought.
Ohhh, @Paclo to sort out the thread title/status.
Depending on whether this deal includes the rear properties, it's somewhere between 0.06ha and 0.11ha, in other words, tiny, and at most usable as un-programmed green space, or maybe a very small playground, but even that is tight.
I looked it over and it's not an easily expandable site, you would need to remove the laneway to go west, which means building a new exit for it on the north end of the site, and on Vaughan you can only go a couple of properties before running into lots of low-rise apartment buildings just big enough to trigger replacement rental needs.
No forethought.
Ohhh, @Paclo to sort out the thread title/status.
Amare
Senior Member
Serious question, why is the city doing this?
Do they not comprehend what usesable/useful park space is?
Anyone with common sense can see that this is idiotic to pursue as park space, so if they themselves cant see that then that's seriously problematic.
Do they not comprehend what usesable/useful park space is?
Anyone with common sense can see that this is idiotic to pursue as park space, so if they themselves cant see that then that's seriously problematic.