There's an upper echelon that this doesn't even touch: One Bloor, Picasso, QRC West, Jackman Law, EY (heritage + tower), 383 Sorauren, Globe and Mail, Massey (bit early to tell), Sun Life (office tower), 7 St Thomas and probably a few others. It's not progressive enough and the finishes are a step below the projects above.
 
Why are people comparing major office projects with residential? The construction costs are not even comparable.
 
Because costs are only one part of the equation. If we're talking pure aesthetics, cost is irrelevant. It's about daring innovation and bold statements - and crisp, immaculate execution.
 
Yeah, well said—it makes perfect sense to compare the subjective aesthetic value across different building types because it's not impossible to construct an interesting or innovative building for any usage. Cost isn't an outright prohibitive factor in daring or interesting design in any standard (i.e. not sports stadiums, etc.) type of development, really.
 
It's certainly true that this building is not at the cutting edge of design and aesthetics. But I think we can appreciate that it's an excellent example for its category.

There are many elements in its construction which are very considerate to its environment, and there's a clear focus on the type of resident it's trying to attract, and how to fulfill their needs. And that is as good and important as a beautiful statement in exterior design.
 
Yeah, I can agree that 88 Scott is an excellent example of overwrought Deco inspired mediocrity.
 
TheKingEast said:
aA
Click to expand...

Not at all, it's pretty atypical aA. It's much closer to HPA for example. It makes the grade for its creative use of material, form and detail as a contemporary interpretation of surrounding brick structures. Sourcing higher quality brick, in custom shapes, with embellished details shows more developed/refined design than the well massed but ultimately straightforward design of 88 Scott.

And yeah budget is a consideration but its how the developer/architect tandem decide to allocate those dollars that makes a difference. That's why its so nice to see priority placed on design on rare occasions like the delta columns at QRC or the brick detail at 383.
 
Nastapoka said:
Not at all, it's pretty atypical aA. It's much closer to HPA for example. It makes the grade for its creative use of material, form and detail as a contemporary interpretation of surrounding brick structures. Sourcing higher quality brick, in custom shapes, with embellished details shows more developed/refined design than the well massed but ultimately straightforward design of 88 Scott.

And yeah budget is a consideration but its how the developer/architect tandem decide to allocate those dollars that makes a difference. That's why its so nice to see priority placed on design on rare occasions like the delta columns at QRC or the brick detail at 383.
Click to expand...

Just kidding. I mean, it's a nice building, but I wouldn't put it among the best looking ones though.
 
Taken Tuesday evening at roughly 6:45pm:
2016-05-03 19.46.00.jpg

2016-05-03 19.46.04.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 2016-05-03 19.46.04.jpg
    2016-05-03 19.46.04.jpg
    722.1 KB · Views: 3,248
  • 2016-05-03 19.46.00.jpg
    2016-05-03 19.46.00.jpg
    773.4 KB · Views: 3,285
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top