[alklay]

Boy, I did not realize I had to like this piece of shite 'cause I did not write a letter to my counsellor. I am writing the letter now.

The illogical apologies for this building just don't end and its kind of funny to watch the intellectual contorsions take place.

"What were you expecting from a building with Harvey's, burger joints and a movie theatre?" Well, I expected at least better than the interior of Vaughan Mills, a discount outlet mall. And I did not even get that. And shouldn't I have expected at least that much, if not more, considering the location?

Many of us have actively supported the idea of design review panel for the city and such a creature, in theory, should prevent future TLS's (or at least prevent such horrid exteriors). This is the best potential solution to this crap, not 'lobby efforts' with developers.

And by the way, one is allowed to hate a building because it is crap, and actively voice that opinion, without having to pass the litmus test in Patriot's post. And thank goodness for that.

 

[3Dementia]

Patriot's horse may be high... hell Patriot may be high... but he's basically right, even if it hurts a bit to acknowledge there's a big difference between passionate rallying cries on an internet forum like UT, and real action. Speaking from experience of course, 42 (great caped defender of the UT brand!)

 

[caltrane74]

Patriot - there was no-one to write to at the time: there was no architectural review occurring in this city when this pile of junk was "designed". Thank goodness such a panel and process is being tested out now.

In regards to the building being "done": the building can still change, finishes can still be added to both the interior and the exterior, improvements can be made. There is no reason we cannot agitate for such things on this forum.

I'd tell you to get off your high horse, but I can see that you're already rolling around on the ground letting PenEquity play with you.

42

I sense a bit of optimism in this post. ( at least with regards to the future of the TLS building)

kinda interesting......

Boy, I did not realize I had to like this piece of shite 'cause I did not write a letter to my counsellor. I am writing the letter now.

The illogical apologies for this building just don't end and its kind of funny to watch the intellectual contorsions take place.

"What were you expecting from a building with Harvey's, burger joints and a movie theatre?" Well, I expected at least better than the interior of Vaughan Mills, a discount outlet mall. And I did not even get that. And shouldn't I have expected at least that much, if not more, considering the location?

Many of us have actively supported the idea of design review panel for the city and such a creature, in theory, should prevent future TLS's (or at least prevent such horrid exteriors). This is the best potential solution to this crap, not 'lobby efforts' with developers.

And by the way, one is allowed to hate a building because it is crap, and actively voice that opinion, without having to pass the litmus test in Patriot's post. And thank goodness for that.

What type of building would you design for the intersection of gwady and tacky???

This is an excellent point.

To add to caltrane's point...

What were you expecting from a building with Harvey's, burger joints and a movie theatre? Come on. Be realistic. This isn't a museum, art gallery or skyscraper. To expect blockbuster stuff from this building is laughable. In fact, if you were expecting a marvel, then the current building is a testament to your failure of action.

For everyones' complaints on here...
-Show us your letters to your councils?
-Show us your lobby efforts at city hall and to the developers to change otherwise?
-Show us your efforts (beyond this blogging forum) to actively influence this project?

If you haven't done anything besides complain on this blog, then, you get what you deserve. Your complaints are fluff without merit.

Moving forward, the building is now done. Perhaps the focus could be on future projects, and even better, for those of you who dislike this project, perhaps you can tell us what YOU WILL DO action wise beyond this blog to ensure such projects are not built again. Maybe then, your harsh criticism will stand on solid ground of your demonstrated actions.

I never saw even 1 article relating to the public outcry in the Toronto Star about how crap the TLS Building was . Obviously no one here (i.e Urban Toronto) cared enough to write the local paper about the "disgrace" that was going up in the centre of the most important city in the universe.

BTW: Didn't see anything on City TV either.

 

[Tuscani01]

I lived through everyone's worst nightmare yesterday. I was walking along Dundas with my roommate and the rain started coming down heavy. We were both wearing white shirts and were soaked. We ended up just ducking into TLS to wait for the rain to break. 30 minutes later, we are sitting in the TLS food court with no sign of the rain ending. We were trapped in TLS! Scary isn't it?

 

[alklay]

You mean people actually write, let alone read, letters to a newspaper? How very pre-internet.

 

[interchange42]

There was a brilliant Letter to the Editor about Segways published in the Globe just today in fact. Letter writing lives on!

42

 

[Tewder]

What type of building would you design for the intersection of gwady and tacky???

You have a point here Caltrane, but I don't think people necessarily have a problem with tack or kitsch at this location, but for god's sake give us spectacular tack if you're going to give it! Give us the bells and whistles. Give us the amusement park-type atmosphere and the unapologetic over-the-top brand of consumerism we were told to expect. Heck, give us some basic finishes to the building rather than exposed duct work and insulation. Nobody was expecting a tasteful refined building but a little bling at this glitzy location would have gone a long way.

I never saw even 1 article relating to the public outcry in the Toronto Star about how crap the TLS Building was . Obviously no one here (i.e Urban Toronto) cared enough to write the local paper about the "disgrace" that was going up in the centre of the most important city in the universe.

BTW: Didn't see anything on City TV either.

Well to be fair this was just about one of the most drawn out constructions we've seen in the city in recent years (remember the blue hoardings?), and it was a while before it even became apparent that the building was not going to be quite what the renderings suggested.

 

[alklay]

So there was no article in the Star stating it was a bad building...and therefore its a good building? Yep, makes sense to me.

 

[marcus_a_j]

Didn't C. Hume write about TLS a few months ago saying how crappy it was (I think the article was negative)? It's probably somewhere in this thread. It wasn't a 'Letter to the Editor' from a concerned citizen, but still something.

 

[caltrane74]

So there was no article in the Star stating it was a bad building...and therefore its a good building? Yep, makes sense to me.

I never said that. - I said if you cared so much about the craptastic building that was going up, why didn't you do something about it?

All I've seen is whine and bitch in the TLS thread, but no real call to arms to remedy the situation. - which makes my point, that the building is not as bad as it has been out to be by certain members posting in this thread.

 

[urbandreamer]

They certainly light this area well at night--feels like a weird daylight experience. Actually, the square and area remind me of the core ste catherine strip in montreal for some reason.

The theatre is huge and rambling--hard to find where you're going, especially if you're drunk

Otherwise, just another barely functional but typical Toronto-style building. Oh well, I no longer get in a knot thinking about the place.

 

[alklay]

This 'why did you not do something about it' is a huge red herring. Buildings are not built by democratic vote and letters to the editor do little, to nothing ,to change architecture (heck, provide me with one example of even a universally hated building that was changed in this city as a result of letters to the editor, internet petitions or school dean sit-ins). Most people on this board are bright enough to know that no amount of 'calling to arms' is going to change this building. This is especially true when so many in this city, including many on this board, have such a low standard and are welcoming of any piece of junk.

The call to arms to remedy the situation is the design review panal. But first, we must stop apologizing and accepting crap architecture...and start calling a spade a spade.

 

[Patriot]

Didn't C. Hume write about TLS a few months ago saying how crappy it was (I think the article was negative)? It's probably somewhere in this thread. It wasn't a 'Letter to the Editor' from a concerned citizen, but still something.

Today's article in the Toronto Star by Christopher Hume commends Dundas Square following earlier harsh words:

"And let's not overlook Dundas Square. It, too, was widely criticized when it opened several years ago. But perhaps the rush to judgment was a bit premature; the city's newest public space has since established itself as a fabulous place to hang out (tables and chairs are provided) and as a popular venue where an endless series of events are held.

The square (on the southeast corner of Yonge and Dundas Sts.) is one of the most powerful signs that Toronto has come of age. This is the city at its most European, its most urban and sophisticated. This is one of those rare occasions where Toronto gets to celebrate Toronto, where form and function merge into one seamless urban whole."

Mr. Hume confesses his 'rush to judgment was a bit premature' of Dundas Square. Why an upbeat tone now? I mean the Square is largely the same. But its purpose is now understood: 'fabulous place to hang out (tables and chairs are provided) and as a popular venue where an endless series of events are held.' Its purpose is not to be an architectural wonder. Critics previously, were treating as if it were the criteria. It wasn't.

The lesson here is to remember why something is being built. If you disagree with its purpose, then it reinforces my suggestions before about lobbying your councillors, the developers and the public to change it for the better. Simply saying it sucks is unjustified if you haven't examined the context and purpose of the building, and haven't demonstrated action to change otherwise. And yes, lobbying efforts, letters to the editor or petitions are great examples of how the public can change things, the Old City Hall is still with us today thanks to that...

There is no high horse here folks. But premature criticisms about Toronto Life Square -that are out of context-, like Mr. Hume's earlier harsh words about Dundas Square, are notes worth thinking about.

 

[Urban Shocker]

An internet petition, grousing about the look of Torch, urging a redesign, and signed by a large number of members of this forum was sent to the developers a few years ago. The misconception that anyone would care what "Online Joe Public" thinks is actually quite widespread hereabouts.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Patriot:

There is no high horse here folks. But premature criticisms about Toronto Life Square -that are out of context-, like Mr. Hume's confession about Dundas Square, are notes worth thinking about.

Actually, if you have been following various postings on this forum re: Hume, you would realize that his criticisms one way or another are notes that often not worth thinking about. But if you insist on quoting him, why not quote what he said about TLS in a more recent commentary of his?

Beyond that, equating Dundas Square to TLS is rather errorenous - for all the Cheapening(tm) the former suffered, there was little question that the materials used is superb; and that the design, like it or hate it, is also well thought out. I don't think TLS shares these qualities. Few are questioning the purpose of TLS - many are questioning how that purpose was executed.

AoD