AlvinofDiaspar said:
This thread is a testament to architectural excellence and first-in-class retail design*. My go to whenever anyone mentions "good design is subjective".

*jokingly

AoD
Click to expand...

Good design is subjective.

This is objectively bad design!
 
Say what you want about Aura, I'd still take this over Daniels Condos or a lot of the other trash being built along the waterfront any day. It fits in well at its location, looks pretty good from afar and the lighting was icing on the cake. The mall is dreadful though.
 
Riseth said:
Say what you want about Aura, I'd still take this over Daniels Condos or a lot of the other trash being built along the waterfront any day. It fits in well at its location, looks pretty good from afar and the lighting was icing on the cake. The mall is dreadful though.
Click to expand...

I will credit Aura for its unique massing and proportions. It doesn’t work from every angle, but the curtain-wall clad upper segment + roofline and lighting feature give it identity on the skyline. One Bloor on the other hand looks incredible up-close and at street level, but from a distance, it tends to blend in with a lot of the newer developments.
 
condovo said:
Everything about Aura is dreadful, inside and out, basement to roof. The crown lighting has been defective almost from Day One. Even dog poop on the waterfront is better than this garbage. I find this conversation triggering! Make it stop!
Click to expand...

Can't agree with that. Looks okay in the skyline and will sort of blend into the area eventually.

The poop on the waterfront is forever.
 
condovo said:
Everything about Aura is dreadful, inside and out, basement to roof. The crown lighting has been defective almost from Day One. Even dog poop on the waterfront is better than this garbage. I find this conversation triggering! Make it stop!
Click to expand...

I was in the "mall" here a couple of days ago and was somehow still shocked by how embarrassingly cheap all the materials and finishes look.

With much hesitation, I can still barely say that I'll take this building over the massive parking lot that was there for decades before...
 
Towered said:
I was in the "mall" here a couple of days ago and was somehow still shocked by how embarrassingly cheap all the materials and finishes look.

With much hesitation, I can still barely say that I'll take this building over the massive parking lot that was there for decades before...
Click to expand...
...that almost feels like the powers that be behind this dishing out a false dichotomy, when there could and should of been something so much better in place of either. /sigh
 
Riseth said:
It's hardly the worst thing built in Toronto in recent years. The upper portion and the crown really save it from total disaster. This part of the city looks good with taller towers and Aura will be complimented by more going forward.
Click to expand...
The surrounding towers cannot come soon enough to hide Aura. Being a large building, it clearly involved many competent consultants, contractors etc, but purely design-wise it's third tier architecture and should not be celebrated in any way. The massing of the bottom half is terrible, and worse when its exterior is seen up close. It's not about budget, but proportions, refinement etc. It should not be part of any architecture discussions - certainly not if we are trying to raise the collective bar for design expectations of the public and developers.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top