jswag
Active Member
Glad that didn't get built... they should leave the base of the CN tower alone.
|
|
|
Pfloyd
New Member
It seems like one of the partners of the firm, Mark Franklin worked at one of the two joint venture firms that designed the CN Tower back in the 70's: WZMH/John Andrews Architects. He worked as a project architect, according to their website. FYI, there is a hierarchy at architecture firms, starting from the top: Partner, Project Manager, Project Architect, Senior Architect, Junior Architect, Intern Architect, etc. So assuming that he, as a project architect designed the tower would be like saying that the project architect in charge of the AGO designed the building and not Frank Gehry and his design team.
Some architects are known to stretch the truth from time to time. Their website's entry for the CN Project is rather unclear, and general about design responsability and other details.
By the way, I called them, and the receptionist did confirm they designed the interiors of the 360 restaurant when it was renovated some years ago.
Thanks for tracking down Baldwin & Franklin - I knew that 'no architect' in the thread title would get a response. Based on the way the building looks, I kinda hate taking it out of the title, but, it's gone...
42
42
adma
Superstar
Their office is still on Richmond E next door to Mystic Muffin, is it?
Yes
MetroMan
Senior Member
So still no news on the new owners? I can't wait to see PenEquity relinquish its position in YD² .
Archivist
Senior Member
I saw this post and immediately went to update TOBuilt, but I realized I had linked this building to Baldwin and Franklin a long time ago - from the hardcopies of the Daily Commercial News.
Their site is hilarious though. There are moments when a modest architectural gesture reverberates loudly. This is speaking of The Torch.
Their site is hilarious though. There are moments when a modest architectural gesture reverberates loudly. This is speaking of The Torch.
emacs
Active Member
serious question: to those mentioning, continuously, the non-perfect things about TLS are such posts used as a catharsis or do you guys honestly think any post here will affect change to the site? i kinda figured if you don't like something you don't bother talking about it.
Art Vandelay
Active Member
I kinda think you don't understand the whole point of the Internet.
grey
Senior Member
What a cute notion.
H
Hydrogen
Guest
I have a feeling that you don't really like people pointing out the (many) things wrong with TLS.
If so, why bother commenting on it?
Dilla
Senior Member
Catharsis. Definitely catharsis.
Pfloyd
New Member
Firstly, everything in the public realm, especially the built environment is open for critique since it affects everybody's life in one way or another. Secondly, we live in an open democratic society. If we take everything that is given to us without question, how are going to progress as a city, country, civilization, human race?
Last edited:
caltrane74
Senior Member
I'm with emacs on this one. - Ya, make your point in a democratic fashion, but continual whining ad nauseam is ridiculous. As for TLS impacting lives in Toronto......
....if you don't mind the concept of Dundas Square, you shouldn't have a problem with TLS.
....if you don't mind the concept of Dundas Square, you shouldn't have a problem with TLS.
Pfloyd
New Member
I personally haven't commented on the TLS bldg. in quite a while, so the "continuous whining" doesn't apply to me-maybe others but that's up to them to respond. I think Dundas Square is a success, and it's a great addition to the city-if you think of it, in North America, only NYC has a similar area. I do think, though, that the design and building quality of TLS and the Dundas Square concept are independent issues and that just because the urban plaza is succesful, it doesn't take away the fact that TLS is a missed opportunity and Penequity, a "slum developer" (as in "slum landlord").
Last edited: