Northern Light said:
Hate is a strong word.



Fine is also a strong word, LOL

*****

Its not particularly attractive, though far from the least appealing towers we've seen built in this City.

Its main sin is the oversized and bulky podium. The towers are more just 'meh'. But for what was supposed to be the signature, the crown jewel of City Place as it were.........well........ it under achieves, by a fair margin.
Click to expand...
I posted about this several pages back. Where's the evidence that this was supposed to be that? It's the last phase. That's it.

Here's @interchange42 addressing that 12 years ago:
interchange42 said:
The point is though that the competition did not determine a winning design - just a designer, so the final design will be subject to limitations on cost, unlike during the competition. Don't expect a building that can't be paid for.

42
Click to expand...
 
ProjectEnd said:
I posted about this several pages back. Where's the evidence that this was supposed to be that? It's the last phase. That's it.

Here's @interchange42 addressing that 12 years ago:
Click to expand...

There was a design competition as I recall...........

You got me looking waaaaaaaayyyy back in the thread to when this was first announced.......... you think comments of the near finished product are harsh, you should refresh yourself on UT's instant reaction to the first renders.....

But I digress:

1718137999695.png


From: https://toronto.skyrisecities.com/f...97m-74s-concord-adex-arcadis.6394/post-932522

****

I should add, PE, your thoughts weren't particularly kind either:

1718138091336.png


Well informed posters noted that Concord was thinking of this as 'the landmark' of CityPlace:

1718138348929.png



A further reference to how this tower was being discussed:

1718138479429.png


****

Here' PE you seem to accept the reference to 'signature tower' without issue:

1718138567732.png
 
ProjectEnd said:
The post was less about the competition and more about the expectation that this would be some sort of backflipping Burj Toronto...I found the post I made about that back in march:

Concord Canada House | 231.97m | 74s | Concord Adex | Arcadis

February 26:
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
Click to expand...

I certainly never asserted that it needed to be 'The Burj'......

Not that I think that's a particularly brilliant building.........

But it's clear that a design competition was held and there were discussions between The City and Concord and the word 'landmark' was used.

I feel comfortable with the assertion that this building under performs what Concord itself implied it would be.

I didn''t think, and I certainly didn't feel, that we were going to get a 'world's best' here......

Simply that it was implied we would get City Place's best here...... and we did not.
 
Last edited:
Either way whether this was/was not supposed to be considered Concord's signature project, this build is a functional waste of prime real estate.

When you're next to a tourist magnet in the CN Tower and a massive entertainment venue which draws thousands at any given point in time, but deliver a gigantic podium which offers absolutely 0 in value to the area asides from cattle herding people into it then that's an abject failure.

The tower itself is a gimmick show that's nothing special.
 
Northern Light said:
I certainly never asserted that it needed to be 'The Burj'......

Not that I think that's a particularly brilliant building.........

But its clear that a design competition was held and there were discussions between The City and Concord and the word 'landmark' was used.

I feel comfortable with the assertion that this building under performs what Concord itself implied it would be.

I didn''t think, and I certainly didn't feel, that we were going to get a 'world's best' here......

Simply that it was implied we would get City Place's best here...... and we did not.
Click to expand...
No doubt Concord Adex think this is their best project in City Place: the extra deep balconies, the balcony heaters - none of these features are available in other City Place buildings (and extremely rare in other Toronto condo buildings). Aesthetically, their idea of creating a landmark building was to make these towers the tallest (by far) in City Place and add a gimmicky maple leaf motif: there, that should please the public who have no stakes in these buildings (ie. non-owners)!
 
Collingwoodbuildinglover said:
So not going to lie as the top gets squared off these two look a little bit better still missed the mark by a freaking mile but could be a million times worse
Click to expand...
exactly... at least the tops are not just going to be left as a dog's breakfast like so many others have been. other than that they are a crime against architecture.
 
Northern Light said:
But for what was supposed to be the signature, the crown jewel of City Place as it were.........well........ it under achieves, by a fair margin.
Click to expand...
...to be fair though, the bar didn't have to be raised too high here for it to be declared "signature". >.<
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top