The proposal doesn't strike me as being any more awful than what is presently there. The area could use some colour, and the building is in desperate need of maintenance. Besides, for those of you that really like it in its current form, 790 Bay street is similar but in much better condition.
 
DtTO said:
The proposal doesn't strike me as being any more awful than what is presently there. The area could use some colour, and the building is in desperate need of maintenance. Besides, for those of you that really like it in its current form, 790 Bay street is similar but in much better condition.
Click to expand...

have you even read the thread?
 
The existing examples of maintenance and/or restoration of these early international style buildings are testament to how delicate and difficult a process it is.

The arrangement of the vertical or horizontal divisions of glass in the horizontal bands of windows that ring many of these buildings is so precise and finely tuned that any new windows must be chosen with the highest level of specificity and sensitivity.

Sadly, all too often the new windows are randomly or indifferently selected. The net result of this insensitivity is that virtually all of them have had their visual integrity and coherence very negatively impacted.

Screenshot2012-12-13at100045PM_zpsb8170772.png

Screenshot2012-12-13at100413PM_zpsb6829072.png

Screenshot2012-12-13at100448PM_zpsf0795e93.png
 
A picture is worth a thousand words. thedeepend, thanks for those photos. I've reevaluated my stance on this project, and I supposed that if they could install new windows and restore the rest of the facade, I would appreciate it a lot more than their proposal to completely alter everything (for the worse).
 
Though he didn't exactly post those as *acceptable* retrofits (quite the contrary). Still, as long as it's a convincing argument for optimum retention of what exists.

Oh, and 790 Bay (seen to the left in the middle photo) isn't the most precise architectural comparison point here.
 
I think the remake is garish, dreadful, and a defacing of a passable modernist structure. In short, it will probably fit right in with Yonge Street as it goes.
 
15 December 2012: The problem is this structure is falling apart. If the existing building has to be "destroyed" I wish they'd just sell it to Cresford.

20121215160942.jpg


20121215160901.jpg


20121215161051.jpg


Clearly this colour was meant as a facade test:
20121215161111.jpg


How much "trash" is in these boxes?
20121215161137.jpg
 
thedeepend said:
this isn't damage from neglect. the building was rammed by a drunk driver recently....
Click to expand...

That's been on the top of my head, too--though I kind of wonder if that was incentive for Scientology to fast-track their renovation plans...
 
adma said:
That's been on the top of my head, too--though I kind of wonder if that was incentive for Scientology to fast-track their renovation plans...
Click to expand...

i think it probably had something to do with the haste with which they seem to be moving...the building sustained quite a grievous blow. i can only imagine how much it would cost to repair that kind of damage, and the shattered marble is almost certainly irreplaceable....
 
thecharioteer said:
I'm suprised no one has mentioned 111 Richmond as as example of how to do it right.
Click to expand...

that's exactly right--i believe it is the sole extant example of how beautiful these early international-style buildings are when the detailing of the windows is maintained....
 
thedeepend said:
i think it probably had something to do with the haste with which they seem to be moving...the building sustained quite a grievous blow. i can only imagine how much it would cost to repair that kind of damage, and the shattered marble is almost certainly irreplaceable....
Click to expand...


interesting to see that it's red brick underneath the marble and not yellow brick like the rest of the building
 
thecharioteer said:
I'm suprised no one has mentioned 111 Richmond as as example of how to do it right.
Click to expand...

Well, I did, on the very first page.

I'm fairly certain others have as well, but I can't bring myself to go back and check. As a despairing fan of our rapidly diminishing stock of mid-century modern, this thread is just too painful to read.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top