[caltrane74]

Viewing this project in context is irrelevant when it looks like crap. You can also look at a pile of sh*t "in context", and come out with different perspectives and opinions of it. In the end, it will still look like a pile of sh*t. There are plenty of retail-advertising projects around the world that look thousands of times better than this monstrosity.

Oh I see what your saying..

which ad covered building here is better than Metropolis?....to me they all look like crap

___________________________________________________________________________

I, and the vast majority of the public who are not in the advertising industry, choose to view it for what it is: an ugly, stupid waste of a building site

What about people in the common sense industry? The building is obviously making the most economic use of the land, look at the buildings that surround it and tell me which one is more viable? - Metropolis will be generating retail/commercial and advertising revenues for it's owners.

and grey please note the following:

.....

• This project sucks -
• In relation to what?
  
  ____________
• It is of little architectural merit
• It's not supposed to be of architectual merit- It's supposed to be covered in advertising
  ______________
• This has been done in other places, and much, much better.
• Of course.. Toronto is new on the Media Square scene, Shinuyba wasn't created in a day.. ( The Dundas Square concept is about 12 Years old if even..Shinuyba-Ginza-Shinjuku, Picadilly Circus, Times Square have been around 100 years or more)
  _____________________
• This project is better suited to Mississauga
• Mississauga has a media square?
  _________________________
• Pen Equity sucks -
• I never said they didn't suck
  ___________________
• The city sucks for allowing this to happen
• Of course this makes total sense. The Yonge Street Flea Market was the best!!!

 

[yyzer]

interesting juxtaposition, cal....I don't see that TLS will be any worse than any of the pictured buildings at TS...although in a sense it is an artificial creation, contrasted with Times Square, which has grown organically...

and folks, whether you like it or not, you had better be prepared that, for better or worse, Toronto Life Square will be one of those things which define what "downtown Toronto" is, more than any other project we have ongoing right now....

 

[Irishmonk]

• This project sucks -
• In relation to what?

In relation to both large commercial/retail/advertising complexes across the street: The Eaton Centre and, yes, Atrium on Bay.

• 
  ___________
• It is of little architectural merit
• It's not supposed to be of architectual merit- It's supposed to be covered in advertising

All buildings should attempt to have architectural merit, no matter what their use and budget. Especially when they're located on the busiest pedestrian intersection in the country.

• 
  ______________
• This has been done in other places, and much, much better.
• Of course.. Toronto is new on the Media Square scene, Shinuyba wasn't created in a day.. ( The Dundas Square concept is about 12 Years old if even..Shinuyba-Ginza-Shinjuku, Picadilly Circus, Times Square have been around 100 years or more)

Like Times Square (which as we all know is not really a square) the Yonge Street "Strip" has been a media/advertising zone for many decades. We are not new to this and we don't get a mulligan for inexperience

• 
  _____________________
• This project is better suited to Mississauga
• Mississauga has a media square?

It would if this project were IN Mississauga which is where the poster is suggesting it should go. In truth, Mississauga deserves something much better than TLS and, indeed, would demand and acquire something superior. (Face it: Missy, for all its faults, actually seems to care about its architecture.)

• Pen Equity sucks -
• I never said they didn't suck
  ___________________
• The city sucks for allowing this to happen
• Of course this makes total sense. The Yonge Street Flea Market was the best!!!

Typical strawman arguement. The Flea Market was never more than a temporary fill in and the choice was not Flea Market or TLS. Any city that thinks this way has self-esteem issues and is doomed to perpetual mediocrity.

To sum up: TLS apologists typically base their arguements around strawmen, negative reasoning and cynicism. Sorry, but that doesn't cut it anymore, not in a city that competes with the likes of Montreal, Chicago and New York for tourist dollars, conventions and executive offices.

 

[Edward]

which ad covered building here is better than Metropolis?....to me they all look like crap

Caltrane74 have you been to Times Square? There are many buildings with signs that are significantly better. Your photo is deceptive.

 

[taal]

Oh I've been there before ... 20+ times.

And that's just bull (excuse my language) although I agree there are individual ads that stand out due to their high quality, the overall sensation is no different .. and no better .. then what TLS is.

 

[turdrockfromthesun]

OK, let's compare with Piccadilly Circus in London.
1,AWSOMNESS: Piccadilly Circus: Awesome
TLS: subtly muted awesomeness
2, GOVERENMNT INTERFRENCE:
Piccadilly circus- government keeps its nose out
TLS: Government was eager to get a millennium project going and will get it done well before 2010, or 2011.
3, ON POSTACRDS:
Piccadilly circus- Thankfully, one of the iconic postcards of London
TLS: Sadly, one of the iconic postcards of Toronto.

POINT: TLS sucks and we have government to blame. Further, this pox will be on all our postcards.

 

[VoiceofReality]

I have to say that I find this banter amusing... I have never seen Yonge & Dundas busier and full of energy. Speaking with a few of the associates at Future Shop they are ecstatic about the sales at Toronto Life Square, they think that it will break records (set by Best Buy last year). Based on current tenants that have been announced, IMO (and at the risk of public ridicule) PenEquity has managed to put together a quality mix of recognizable tenants that would not have gone anywhere close to Yonge & Dundas just a few years ago. In fact while doing a little research for this response I just noticed that the current Wikipedia page names Milestones as a restaurant that will be locating at Toronto Life Square. Not to say the source is 100% credible or that Milestones or Jack Astor’s are the best restaurants in Toronto, but the fact is that major corporate restaurant and retail groups view Yonge & Dundas (and not only the Eaton Centre) as a viable opportunity (forget the fact that they are located on the 4th floor). If PenEquity was so inept why haven’t the ‘real developers / landlords’ (outside of the Eaton Centre / atrium) stepped up on Yonge Street or anywhere in Downtown Yonge?

IMO while design is important to one’s experience, having quality Tenants is equally if not more important. Given that retail / restaurants are experience based businesses again I question how so many people including St. Joseph’s Media who own world renowned design / media companies can be fooled into joining and naming such a ‘hideous’ development. While not a piece of art I believe Toronto Life Square offers quality tenants and entertainment options that I look forward to enjoying as often as possible. Regarding the signs and the gaps that have been left over, I seem to remember chatter a few years back when PenEquity applied for a signage variance to increase their signage right to fill in the gaps, guess what, the city turned it down.

 

[turdrockfromthesun]

There's a painful degree of wisdom in what you say, but this could have been achieved without expropriating the property that was there and turfing out the businesses who had an alternate plan,(without the 10 year wait for OK-ness) There was an awesome "Lick's Burgers"... So, whatever happened to Wolfgang Puck? Been replaced by a perfectly fine chain restaurants (Or dreaded 'eatery')- to be host, my hope its that the chains Will takeover the distillery district.
The point is that the city screwed it all up rather badly. Yeah -it's 100% "OK-ish" sort of! If the city listened to what the business that were there already wanted, they probably could have forced a spruce- up, some advertising, etc and the like - I have no doubt about it whatsoever.

 

[yin_yang]

I have to say that I find this banter amusing... I have never seen Yonge & Dundas busier and full of energy. Speaking with a few of the associates at Future Shop they are ecstatic about the sales at Toronto Life Square, they think that it will break records (set by Best Buy last year). Based on current tenants that have been announced, IMO (and at the risk of public ridicule) PenEquity has managed to put together a quality mix of recognizable tenants that would not have gone anywhere close to Yonge & Dundas just a few years ago. In fact while doing a little research for this response I just noticed that the current Wikipedia page names Milestones as a restaurant that will be locating at Toronto Life Square. Not to say the source is 100% credible or that Milestones or Jack Astor’s are the best restaurants in Toronto, but the fact is that major corporate restaurant and retail groups view Yonge & Dundas (and not only the Eaton Centre) as a viable opportunity (forget the fact that they are located on the 4th floor). If PenEquity was so inept why haven’t the ‘real developers / landlords’ (outside of the Eaton Centre / atrium) stepped up on Yonge Street or anywhere in Downtown Yonge?

IMO while design is important to one’s experience, having quality Tenants is equally if not more important. Given that retail / restaurants are experience based businesses again I question how so many people including St. Joseph’s Media who own world renowned design / media companies can be fooled into joining and naming such a ‘hideous’ development. While not a piece of art I believe Toronto Life Square offers quality tenants and entertainment options that I look forward to enjoying as often as possible. Regarding the signs and the gaps that have been left over, I seem to remember chatter a few years back when PenEquity applied for a signage variance to increase their signage right to fill in the gaps, guess what, the city turned it down.

I do agree with you on the tenants vs. looks weighing...but there IS a Milestone's a 20 minute walk away. just saying. and while some aspects of the outside are great (the victoria street side, and the glass colour...many things are terrible (fans, presumed monotomy of signs, the huge AMC theatres,the height/lack of tower component)

 

[adma]

Oh I see what your saying..

which ad covered building here is better than Metropolis?....to me they all look like crap

Er...actually, in that photo, I find the visible architecture (and I mean the *newer* stuff, never mind Paramount) plainly superior to Metropolis--even that "banal" 70s box to the left. And as for that which is "ad covered", it's a matter of either more felicity in the design/accomodation of ads (thanks to thoroughgoing TS-area architectural/planning guidelines over the past quarter century); or else, in the case of the ex-Times/Allied Chemical tower in the middle, the merciful total-coverage of a mutilated white elephant.

Your judgment's clumsy IMO.

 

[Irishmonk]

...I seem to remember chatter a few years back when PenEquity applied for a signage variance to increase their signage right to fill in the gaps, guess what, the city turned it down.

"I seem to remember chatter a few years back..." doesn't exactly qualify as factual evidence. Is there something, say, in the written record that would confirm your vague recollection of the city's decision making process regarding this project? If the other media towers are any indication of the city's aesthetic guidelines your claim is highly suspect.

In general your remarks that we should be happy to be getting corporate chain restaurants and the like at our most visible intersection does not speak well of the aspirations of this city. Yes, I'm sure third or fourth tier cities like Winnipeg or Buffalo would love to have this kind of project in their downtown hearts. But the Bostons and Chicagos of the world would never tolerate something this shabby. Which kind of city are we trying to be?

 

[alklay]

One could have had decent retail with decent architecture.

Unfortunately, all the excuses for bad architecture (its better than what was there before, the signs will get better, the retail is good, it serves its purpose) are just excuses. Its still bad architecture and it could have been, and should have been, so much better.

And Taal, if you have been to Times Square you would know that the 'overall sensation' is night and day between Yonge Dundas Square and the New York version. There simply is no comparison. And there are plenty of examples in Times Square (in fact, everything that has been built in the last 15 years) that demonstrates better architecture and quality than TLS.

And I do not believe the city ever turned down any request by TLS for better or different signs. Why would they?

 

[adma]

Quick Question: Did the building renovations over the past 8 years make the Eaton Centre better or worse?

If you say better, then obivously there were parts of the Eaton Centre that needed retooling to create the pleasing exterior/interior aesthetics.

Actually, count me in with those who find the last decade of Eaton Centre "retooling", or at least the motivations behind it, to be a bit on the desperate side ("get rid of that 70s high-tech aesthetic! it's dated! a monstrous carbuncle!")

And even if I were to take a purposely neutral and accepting POV of what's been done, I'd have to offer that both the present "urbanizing" Yonge front and its uncompromising pile-o-pipes predecessor are superior to Metropolis. That's what "architecture" brings ya (thanks, Ebbie Z.)

 

[Irishmonk]

Perhaps another letter writing campaign to Kyle Rae and his minions is in order. Something along the lines of We Are Not Happy with this POS!

 

[adma]

In general your remarks that we should be happy to be getting corporate chain restaurants and the like at our most visible intersection does not speak well of the aspirations of this city. Yes, I'm sure third or fourth tier cities like Winnipeg or Buffalo would love to have this kind of project in their downtown hearts. But the Bostons and Chicagos of the world would never tolerate something this shabby. Which kind of city are we trying to be?

Getting aside from architecture, who says the Bostons and Chicagos *wouldn't* tolerate "corporate chain restaurants and the like" in the most visible parts of their downtown hearts? It's tourist and suburban-daytripper dollars, bay-bee--look at the Magnificent Mile, et al. If you want gentility, look to the side streets...