ushahid said:
Do u expect them to build burj Khalifa and Marina bay sands in Toronto?
Click to expand...

I mean, this project is designed by the same architect who designed the Burj Khalifa and split off from SOM during its construction 😉 With that said, I feel that AS+GG aren't getting the attention they deserve here. We're talking about the same designers behind the tallest residential tower in the western hemisphere (Central Park Tower), the Trump Tower in Chicago, and the Greenland Tower in Chengdu.
 
The designer name on the documents is AS+GG Canada Partnership - so it may not solely be the main firm
 
Automation Gallery said:
Don't get your hopes to high, by the time it's all said and done this will have shrunk to a box
Click to expand...

By whom?

You managed not to slag City Planning head on in this post; so perhaps you have someone new to accuse of plotting against height, or interesting architecture?

****

While it is always possible that this developer will engage in bait and switch; while it is possible this is merely a value exercise or for some other reason the property and associated rights will be transferred to a different company with different ideas......

There is absolutely zero proof in your post to support either assertion.

Needless to say, your favourite boogey-man City Planning does not have a say in the material palette or architectural style of this building.

It is certainly possible the height will be tweaked; but there is no evidence that it will either.

Nor that the building would look any less appealing if 5 floors shorter (to pick a number)

Could you please restrain yourself from endless posts implying a conspiracy to rob Toronto of great architecture or 100-floor buildings?

It really doesn't add value to the discussion.

By all means, if you have evidence such changes are afoot, that is discussion worthy.

But making it up; not so much.
 
argus said:
Yes, an opinion. And it's fine that you have one. But having an opinion on what all people in North America think about contemporary architecture is an opinion that goes a little too far.

At least that's my opinion of your opinion.
Click to expand...
Yes, I think I went too far although I still think that buildings with unique shapes are too often labelled as "great architecture". To me, architecture is much more than shapes or futuristic amenities.
ushahid said:
Do u expect them to build burj Khalifa and Marina bay sands in Toronto?
Click to expand...
I don't expect every building to be a landmark, but I do expect interesting forms and a sense of character. They could've made the base less glassy and more interesting for pedestrians (with more consideration for the older buildings around it), used a less corporate facade with more colour and alternative materials, and perhaps even change the shape of the building to make it less boxy and more interesting (like CIBC Square).
 
condovo said:
Northern Light, can you please take care of this? Thx.
Click to expand...

Gee, you had to go there for condovo...lol.....moderators can you please delete that nonsense. Thx


Northern Light said:
By whom?

You managed not to slag City Planning head on in this post; so perhaps you have someone new to accuse of plotting against height, or interesting architecture?

****

While it is always possible that this developer will engage in bait and switch; while it is possible this is merely a value exercise or for some other reason the property and associated rights will be transferred to a different company with different ideas......

There is absolutely zero proof in your post to support either assertion.

Needless to say, your favourite boogey-man City Planning does not have a say in the material palette or architectural style of this building.

It is certainly possible the height will be tweaked; but there is no evidence that it will either.

Nor that the building would look any less appealing if 5 floors shorter (to pick a number)

Could you please restrain yourself from endless posts implying a conspiracy to rob Toronto of great architecture or 100-floor buildings?

It really doesn't add value to the discussion.

By all means, if you have evidence such changes are afoot, that is discussion worthy.

But making it up; not so much.
Click to expand...


i love this proposal:cool: ..but know that nothing is set in stone in Toronto due to height issues, density, etc.: .
.NL go to page 20-23 @ https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/820-church-street.25309/ and tell me what's the difference from what you said
...hey, what i posted and you posted are both negative on the specific proposal, but it's all about free speech my friend and hopefully we keep it that way
and condovo im disappointed at you not taking care of it yourself and getting someone else to stir the pot
by the way NL- Condovoi i have been around long enough on UT to not make things up.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Gee, you had to go there for condovo...lol.....moderators can you please delete that nonsense. Thx





i love this proposal:cool: ..but know that nothing is set in stone in Toronto due to height issues, density, etc.: .
.NL go to page 20-23 @ https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/threads/820-church-street.25309/ and tell me what's the difference from what you said
...hey, what i posted and you posted are both negative on the specific proposal, but its all about free speech my friend and hopefully we keep it that way
and condovo im disappointed at you not taking care of it yourself and getting someone else to stir the pot
by the way NL- Condovoi i have been around long enough on UT to not make things up.
Click to expand...

Uhh, really?

For the record, what I said in that post was:

Something that should be talked about here is what the likely final size/appearance of TRL will be 10-20 years from now.

In a society that evolving away from paper books to at least some degree, the TRL not only remains popular be continues to be extremely busy.

I would argue some further expansion (likely vertical in nature) will be forthcoming at some point. At that time, some change of portions of the exterior might be expected as well.

Before the this gets approved, let's make sure someone's bedroom window isn't level with a new TRL floor 6, and that thoughtful and complimentary choices have been made.
Click to expand...


If you don't see the difference between that and your post, I can't help you.

PS. 'Free Speech" has nothing whatever to with what you choose to post on a privately-owned, public-facing forum; unless what you posted offended the sitting government who then threatened you with jail.

What you (and I) are exercising is a privilege, not a right.
 
Last edited:
Holy crap all 3 of you have been here since 2007 and somehow a discussion about a building propsal has devolved into a debate about free speech on a public forum. You all look a little immature right now no offence.

I for one think this is nice looking propsal. Nothing crazy but better than most of what Toronto gets and I feel like that's something.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top