Up&Away said:
Does anyone have any updates from Monday's open house? Any design changes?
Click to expand...

The Monday, April 29th meeting was the formal, statutory meeting required under the existing legal process for submission of applications requiring approvals into Toronto's planing process. Only one major design change was presented, and that as a potential option, and not as a committed plan - that the Anderson building front facade (the Terra Cotta front) would be incorporated into a podium structure facade. Mixed reactions - some appeared to like this, others felt that it would be a sell-out, and that for the integrity of the overall design vision - Let Gehry be Gehry.
 
Thank you AHK for the info!
When I read that they had considered a two building option (with one being a 111 stories), I had hoped that they would have presented that option at the meeting. Sounds like they are trying to be somewhat flexible with the design.
 
steveve said:
I just hope this complex doesn't ruin out skyline view from the west, considering it'll be blocking out most of FCP and Scotia Plaza.
Click to expand...

The FCP and SP view is getting tiring. Both are just average buildings with a decent height. Nothing really stands out for these two buildings except being the tallest two in Canada - which doesn't mean much. Ask yourself, does anyone outside Toronto know the name of these two towers? They are not Empire State Building or Chrysler Building.

If they are blocked, so what. They don't have to the center of our skyline. The only reason they have been is simply that there is nothing better.
 
bleu said:
The FCP and SP view is getting tiring. Both are just average buildings with a decent height. Nothing really stands out for these two buildings except being the tallest two in Canada - which doesn't mean much. Ask yourself, does anyone outside Toronto know the name of these two towers? They are not Empire State Building or Chrysler Building.

If they are blocked, so what. They don't have to the center of our skyline. The only reason they have been is simply that there is nothing better.
Click to expand...

+1. From the west I'd enjoy seeing something other than FCP. Anything other than a box will be an improvement
 
I wonder how this project will be affected given the slow down in condo sales. Would they proceed with only one tower? If so, which one? The OCAD space is a tool to influence the city but David's art museum is his real ambition. It will be interesting to see how this moves forward. Perhaps the slow down won't affect this project due to it's location and the Ghery influence. Who knows.
 
I don't know about other people, but I for one do like this "Slow Down".

It is the time, and place Real design wins buyers; Toronto can now acquire the real jems in skyscrapers we've been denied so far in the boom period.
It's about time developers go back to the drawing room if they want to make money.
 
Actually that does raise an interesting point which is: has Toronto's condo market matured to the point where the physical aesthetic form of the building matters to enough people to create a "design" niche market?

Myself I would consider the physical aesthetics of a building as a bonus but it would not factor in to the primary decision criteria I would use. Location, price, physical layout of the unit are examples of primary consideration. I would have no problem buying a unit in an ugly building in the same neighbourhood as an architectural wonder if the physical layout and price point were more attractive.
 
TR:

Tentative yes, I think - given the experiences with Absolute, L Tower, etc. - and Frank Gehry can probably claim to be a better draw than MAD and Libeskind. Given his age, Veblen effect will come into play as well I think.

AoD
 
TrickyRicky said:
Actually that does raise an interesting point which is: has Toronto's condo market matured to the point where the physical aesthetic form of the building matters to enough people to create a "design" niche market?

Myself I would consider the physical aesthetics of a building as a bonus but it would not factor in to the primary decision criteria I would use. Location, price, physical layout of the unit are examples of primary consideration. I would have no problem buying a unit in an ugly building in the same neighbourhood as an architectural wonder if the physical layout and price point were more attractive.
Click to expand...


What buyers and developers need to realize is that there's no relation whatsoever between excellent internal layout and excellent aesthetics. But both (should) contribute to the value of the building.
 
TrickyRicky said:
Actually that does raise an interesting point which is: has Toronto's condo market matured to the point where the physical aesthetic form of the building matters to enough people to create a "design" niche market?

Myself I would consider the physical aesthetics of a building as a bonus but it would not factor in to the primary decision criteria I would use. Location, price, physical layout of the unit are examples of primary consideration. I would have no problem buying a unit in an ugly building in the same neighbourhood as an architectural wonder if the physical layout and price point were more attractive.
Click to expand...

And that's exactly why we don't get great architecture. When people start to value design and creativity, things will change but until then, just expect mostly more of the same grey, spandrel disappointments.
 
Serious? Those Are just so amazing.
Please except Torontonians! please please except these designs!!!!!!! if theyre cut down at the least keep tne same concept!
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top