MetroMan said:
What a disgusting piece of horse shit. This concrete bunker is completely out of place. Look how it overwhelms the Stanley Barracks.

Is it too early to start demolishing it? ...No? I could've sworn that this hunk of concrete was built in 1973.
Click to expand...

Just make sure to demolish it before it's old enough to be considered heritage.
 
Although this may not be a bright star in terms of architecture, it's quite decent for what it is and relative to other convention center hotels.
If you really want to appreciate terrible architecture, head to the Anaheim California convention hotels and it'll make you feel a lot better about Hotel X. You were never going to get the Royal York built here as that isn't what it's designed for.
 
Lyphe said:
Although this may not be a bright star in terms of architecture, it's quite decent for what it is and relative to other convention center hotels.
If you really want to appreciate terrible architecture, head to the Anaheim California convention hotels and it'll make you feel a lot better about Hotel X. You were never going to get the Royal York built here as that isn't what it's designed for.
Click to expand...
You are REALLY far too kind (or unthinking). We may not expect (or deserve) an iconic building but this is REALLY a piece of shit and is VERY obvious as it is the only high-rise in the area. They have NO excuse, it is no cheaper to build shit, it just takes some skill and that was, sadly, lacking. Aura is, at least, 'interesting' from far away - though terrible at street level and below.
 
Lyphe said:
Although this may not be a bright star in terms of architecture, it's quite decent for what it is and relative to other convention center hotels.
If you really want to appreciate terrible architecture, head to the Anaheim California convention hotels and it'll make you feel a lot better about Hotel X. You were never going to get the Royal York built here as that isn't what it's designed for.
Click to expand...

I think we're all disgusted by this because of where it was built and given that a much nicer design was originally planned before the project was suspiciously handed to a developer who's friends with certain city councillors. This stinks of corruption and the developer has completely proven itself unqualified for a project in a location of this importance.

If it had been built down the street somewhere, we could just ignore it. But this is in the middle of a low rise district with a lot of heritage architecture and potential for a beautiful walkable neighbourhood next to the lake.

The original plan called for a frosted glass tower with greenery planted on terraces to diminish its impact by letting it fall into the background sky.

urbantoronto-6124-19589.jpg
 
Lyphe said:
Although this may not be a bright star in terms of architecture, it's quite decent for what it is and relative to other convention center hotels.
If you really want to appreciate terrible architecture, head to the Anaheim California convention hotels and it'll make you feel a lot better about Hotel X.
Click to expand...

Wait...I have to go all the way to Anaheim to see worse hotel architecture? Hotel X is that bad?!

I am not surprised.

;)
 
Ok, I see a lot of members being personally attacked for their possibly liking a design. Is it me, a or did I not get that memo about being in favour or positive about a project is a “no no”.
 
Bogtrotter said:
This is very middle America suburban. Toronto should be striving for a lot better than this, particularly given its location.
Click to expand...

Yes Toronto should be striving for better, but they keep building crap after crap. This joins the long list of shitty ugly looking buildings that have been built in the last decade.
 
ptbotrmpfn said:
Ok, I see a lot of members being personally attacked for their possibly liking a design. Is it me, a or did I not get that memo about being in favour or positive about a project is a “no no”.
Click to expand...
I'm seeing disagreement being expressed, not something strong enough to label an "attack." And, as much as I think you're overstating both the degree of vitriol and the number of people who have stated they like this building, I think you're underplaying the quality of the building as a trigger for the dislike, dismissing it all merely as inveterate Toronto-deprecation. Sure, there are many posts which dismiss the building without much explanation, but the thread is replete with posts by "a lot of members" detailing Hotel X's aesthetic crimes. The opposition to this project is not empty.

42
 
A better way to indicate agreement, one that doesn't trigger the New Posts feature, is to hit the Like link!

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top