[khris]

Not much, look above at the dataBase

I've seen the images. They don't really show too much. I'm sure it won't be much, but who knows. Maybe it will get lit up or have unique cladding.

 

[stjames2queenwest]

I'm hoping for lights myself.

 

[interchange42]

Yesterday, from Queen Street:

42

 

[Benito]

From Yonge and Bloor.

 

[Marcanadian]

Jarvis Street by Marcus Mitanis, on Flickr

Jarvis Street by Marcus Mitanis, on Flickr

 

[TheKingEast]

Both D's are trucking

 

[someMidTowner]

Today:

 

[Marcanadian]

Pace by Marcus Mitanis, on Flickr

Pace by Marcus Mitanis, on Flickr

 

[interchange42]

From Leslieville earlier today:

42

 

[Adjei]

Another box

 

[Mongo]

Another box

I really hate this criticism. What are the buyers supposed to do, pay twice the PSF to live in a corkscrew? Rectilinear designs are the most resource-efficient way to provide living space (which is better for the environment) and hence allow more people to actually live in those buildings for a given expenditure. It's easy to criticize a design for being "a box", but you should also inform the buyers that they have to pay substantially more for their unit, to satisfy your desire for non-boxes.

 

[stjames2queenwest]

Sure it's a box. But it has redeeming qualities. Like it's super slender profile. It's splash of colour at street level... Also just its pioneering of the neighbourhood is something. Boxes are ok, atleast it looks different from other buildings in the area.

 

[smably]

As someone in another thread pointed out, not every building has to be an architectural marvel. This building is a solid, middle-of-the-road design. It doesn't try to do anything too exciting, but it is quietly competent and efficient, and will add a whole lot of new residents to a corner that needs them.

Besides, it's a million times better than the dog's breakfast of balconies that's going in on the opposite corner.

 

[Torontovibe]

As someone in another thread pointed out, not every building has to be an architectural marvel.

Are you telling us that every building in Toronto right now is an architectural marvel? So it's OK for this building to not be great because we already have an over supply of the world's best buildings? I haven't noticed this massive collection of architectural gems, so can you post some pics and enlighten me.

I just can't relate to your statement at all. It implies that every building we have now is a marvel, so it's fine to have a clunker now and then. Are you familiar with "The Star Of Downtown"? Is that on your list of architectural marvels?

 

[Stupidandshallow]

I really hate this criticism. What are the buyers supposed to do, pay twice the PSF to live in a corkscrew? Rectilinear designs are the most resource-efficient way to provide living space (which is better for the environment) and hence allow more people to actually live in those buildings for a given expenditure. It's easy to criticize a design for being "a box", but you should also inform the buyers that they have to pay substantially more for their unit, to satisfy your desire for non-boxes.

Sometimes the end consumer/buyer doesn't always have to bear the burden... Seriously, how much did Great Gulf pay for this lot/land?

Also, I'm of the school that great design solves problems! I'm sure it's possible to create a resource-efficient buildings that don't look like clones/crappy Toronto towers.

Adjei, I'm with you.. this is a boring box. I am glad that it is adding density and more people to an area that desperately needs it.. but it is a forgettable tower. It could be anywhere in this city.