The rendering view makes me wish U-Avenue had a direct straight line of sight from Q's Park to Lake Ontario--much more dramatic imo. Now the Vancouver-style awkard-looking S-La will create a further "barrier."
Click to expand...

Interesting that Shangri-La has used this as a selling point. Remember the rendering of the building viewed from above Queen's Park plastered all over its recent ads.

I don't mind it. It doesn't dominate this view the way that the Sheraton dominates at Cith Hall and Nathan Phillips Square.
 
That swirl in the rendering really changes everything for me, but I've seen little evidence to suggest that the swirl will become a reality. Every recent official rendering I've seen (mostly the podium comparisons) has a flat, slightly curved top.
 
Agreed. If the swirl hasn't been cheapened out yet and is still hiding in the design, I'll be excited. But if it is, why haven't any promotional renders shown it? And why haven't JBM or any of the other newswriters covering this story mentioned it? (Or did I just miss it?)
 
Should we just skip the anticipation and refer to it in the past tense?
 
Agreed. If the swirl hasn't been cheapened out yet and is still hiding in the design, I'll be excited. But if it is, why haven't any promotional renders shown it? And why haven't JBM or any of the other newswriters covering this story mentioned it? (Or did I just miss it?)
Click to expand...


You know all the complaining and whining is difficult enough to wade through without having to read guesses about future disappointments and cheapenings.

How about thinking it but not posting it? Help reduce clutter.

Fact: No-one on this forum (or writing about architecture for a newspaper) has ever seen a rendering of the tower portion of Aura, in any of its incarnations, from any POV except looking north-west.

Fact: A long time ago I posted the "swirl" elevation from the planning dept... pretty good evidence. If any of you have evidence to contrary, post it. Nevermind, you can't.

Here's an idea... instead of posting your plans to be disappointed "if this" or "if that" happens... try putting some elbow grease into it.

That's what some of us do for the forum. Share news, post pretty pictures, dig out factoids and contribute something more than just moans and groans.

Try contacting someone in the know who can help you plan better for future disappointments.

Example:

From the architect (Barry Graziani) by email this evening:

"The upper portion of the tower is still two intersecting curvilinear forms."

Incidently, the curve of the west side tower begins 10 floors lower than the curve of the east side..... hinted at in the original elevations/renders.

Place raspberry sound here__________________. Best regards.
 
^ Is that an example, or an actual response you got, 3D?

If that's an actual response, then fantastic. Props to you for getting it.

As for the rest of it... well, I asked a fair question above, and - though there was some groaning from the machinery - it got answered, and in excellent time too. Not bad for an Internet forum.
 
Perhaps they haven't released renderings from other angles because they haven't decided *exactly* what the shape of the "intersecting curvilinear forms" is going to look like (a circle vs a more flattened oval, which may affect the degree of incline, or maybe the swirl will not be as smooth/continuous as Maldive suggests, etc.).
 
Of course it's a real email response. And my point stands re: guessing about future disappointment. Being one of the few "glass half full" members here... it's annoying when patrons are stumbling around and nearly spilling my drink. :eek:
 
MisterF said:
Well when someone builds a high rise in the middle of a boulevard, be sure to let me know.
Click to expand...

How about a castle?

1_Spadina_Crescent.JPG
 
3Dementia said:
You know all the complaining and whining is difficult enough to wade through without having to read guesses about future disappointments and cheapenings.

How about thinking it but not posting it? Help reduce clutter.

Fact: No-one on this forum (or writing about architecture for a newspaper) has ever seen a rendering of the tower portion of Aura, in any of its incarnations, from any POV except looking north-west.

Fact: A long time ago I posted the "swirl" elevation from the planning dept... pretty good evidence. If any of you have evidence to contrary, post it. Nevermind, you can't.

Here's a better idea... instead of posting your plans to be disappointed "if this" or "if that" happens... try putting some elbow grease into it.

That's what some of us do for the forum. Share news, post pretty pictures, dig out factoids and contribute something more than just moans and groans.

Try contacting someone in the know who can help you plan better for future disappointments.

Example:

From the architect (Barry Graziani) by email this evening:

"The upper portion of the tower is still two intersecting curvilinear forms."

Incidently, the curve of the west side tower begins 10 floors lower than the curve of the east side..... hinted at in the original elevations/renders.

Place raspberry sound here__________________. Best regards.
Click to expand...

Fact: This is a discussion forum.

Here's a better idea: let's not try to dictate what others should discuss on a discussion forum :)

Why get so worked up about rampant speculation? This isn't an official city planning document, it's a place for discussion. Just post your facts and let the thread run wild with conjecture, then when the thing gets built, you can quote yourself and act smugly. It's every forum veteran's dream.

Anyway, if the swirl was still there, you'd think they'd draw a lot more attention to it since it would be the building's defining feature by a longshot. Maybe the renderings are really bad and they decided that the corner view with the podium at the intersection was a more important feature.
 
grey said:
Anyway, if the swirl was still there, you'd think they'd draw a lot more attention to it since it would be the building's defining feature by a longshot. Maybe the renderings are really bad and they decided that the corner view with the podium at the intersection was a more important feature.
Click to expand...

I'm not sure the swirl is the buildings defining feature. The developers really seem to be pushing the podium and statement that it is the tallest all-residentail tower in Canada. This could be to highlight the two most significant differences from 1BE where the podium is fairly lame and the roof element is hailed as a defining feature.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top