Bond is bland, but I wouldn't call it *bad*. This is tougher. I always prefer to wait to project completion to offer final judgement though, so lets wait and see how this turns out. Maybe that public art will end up saving it.

I called it boring, not bad. I pass this building every day. Pulic art will not help this thing.
 
How twisted that every new condo in the Entertainment District is a bore.

I think Picasso and Tableau are somewhere between "quite good" and "interesting if lacking a touch of refinement", but certainly neither is a bore. Plus there are some interesting projects in the pipeline (like Frank Gehry's first ever Toronto towers).
 
Hmm, on second thought I'll revise that. Final report has it at 'approximately' 750sm.

SPA drawing set has it at 786sm GCA, 745 GFA. I was mistakenly looking at the salable which is 651.
 
Hmm, on second thought I'll revise that. Final report has it at 'approximately' 750sm.

SPA drawing set has it at 786sm GCA, 745 GFA. I was mistakenly looking at the salable which is 651.

For those not familiar with the terminology and abbreviations:

GCA = Gross Construction Area - total floor plate, including electrical and mechanical plenums, elevator shafts, garbage chutes, walls, etc.

GFA = Gross Floor Area - includes, the actual suites themselves, hallways, lobbies, the on-floor garbage room space, anywhere there is a floor or landing (I think the stairs themselves may count, but not 100% sure)

Salable area is sum of the 'Builder's Measurement' of the size of actual suites which are to be sold on the floor.
 
I know there are height restrictions in areas of the core, which seem to be out of date at this point, but the number of condos at 48-49 stories seems odd.
Is 50 stories some sort of benchmark that surpasses these height restrictions, or is it some level that firms believe will pass through unopposed.
This height in the entertainment district is becoming a bore, as has been pointed out before. Mirvish and Gehry will break the monotony, but there are more in this range on the horizon.
I'm not trying to be facetious, just curious as to the reasoning.
 
As boring as it gets for Core. That's 2 buildings designed by Core in the immediate area that I don't like. The Bond and now this. I think it has more to do with the developer though.

The only positive one can draw is that these buildings can be refurbished, upgraded, and re-clad in the future. Hopefully some of these new buildings can get redone within the next 20 years. Till then, we can just avoid these areas or squint.
 
Last edited:
The only positive one can draw is that these buildings can be refurbished, upgraded, and re-clad in the future. Hopefully some of these new buildings can get redone within the next 20 years. Till then, we can just avoid these areas or squint.

I wonder how many of them will need to be seriously rebuilt due to poor construction.
 
DSC00117.jpg

DSC00118.jpg

DSC00140.jpg

DSC00141.jpg

DSC00143.jpg

DSC00144.jpg
DSC00145.jpg
 

Attachments

  • DSC00117.jpg
    DSC00117.jpg
    33.1 KB · Views: 736
  • DSC00118.jpg
    DSC00118.jpg
    43 KB · Views: 677
  • DSC00140.jpg
    DSC00140.jpg
    35.8 KB · Views: 656
  • DSC00141.jpg
    DSC00141.jpg
    40.1 KB · Views: 652
  • DSC00143.jpg
    DSC00143.jpg
    62.1 KB · Views: 634
  • DSC00144.jpg
    DSC00144.jpg
    104.3 KB · Views: 597
  • DSC00145.jpg
    DSC00145.jpg
    96.4 KB · Views: 640

Back
Top