I am not really sure why they decided to keep that ugly Toronto Star building. Should have demolished it and built something new.

Mississauga is building the Exchange Tower complex. They demolished a similarly ugly looking brutalist 1970's relic and are building fresh.
Your personal distaste for Brutalism doesn't mean it's objectively ugly. People had a similar "out with the old" mentality in the second half of the 20th century, and it led to a lot of unnecessary destruction
 
There is history that should be preserved. I agree with the fact that they have destroyed alot of history that was worth preserving. But this is a shoe box, not history.
And people used to to call the world trade center "filing cabinets", This is an iconic building, half a century old. all it needs is some nice cladding and the addition.
 
Most of it is ;)
In your black and white opinion, sure. But this is subjective and you aren't the ultimate authority on what has architectural value!
Many on UT appreciate Brutalism, myself included. You can only speak for yourself here
 
To be fair the I don't believe the old Toronto Star building is either brilliant or an eye sore if properly maintained. What was remarkable when it was built was where it was built, nothing else near it. I assume it was placed there for the ground floor space needed for the printing room. It would in my opinion be best from a waste reduction perspective and ideally to break up a rather monotonic sea of glass we are creating near the waterfront to retain the building. Since that is the plan all is well.
 
In your black and white opinion, sure. But this is subjective and you aren't the ultimate authority on what has architectural value!
Many on UT appreciate Brutalism, myself included. You can only speak for yourself here

Nah, I'm just countering what I regard as an excessive admiration on this forum for a fairly ugly style. Inserting a grey, if you will. In Toronto, Robarts Library is probably the only good looking brutalist building. The rest is passable at best and ugly at worst. Certainly, all the Brutalist office buildings, schools and ratty apartment buildings from the 60s are nothing to celebrate. edit - don't get me wrong, I love me a solid, well built concrete building over modern spandrel and glass crap. But bare concrete is not attractive. There's good ways and bad ways of treating concrete and brutalism usually shades toward the latter. Anyway, this is off topic and we can move on.

@smably fine, one of two lmao
 
Last edited:
Nah, I'm just countering what I regard as an excessive admiration on this forum for a fairly ugly style. Inserting a grey, if you will. In Toronto, Robarts Library is probably the only good looking brutalist building. The rest is passable at best and ugly at worst. Certainly, all the Brutalist office buildings, schools and ratty apartment buildings from the 60s are nothing to celebrate. edit - don't get me wrong, I love me a solid, well built concrete building over modern spandrel and glass crap. But bare concrete is not attractive. There's good ways and bad ways of treating concrete and brutalism usually shades toward the latter. Anyway, this is off topic and we can move on.
I would add Manulife Centre to that, even with all the later additions. Otherwise, I agree with you. Brutalism in Toronto is mediocre at best and even Robarts and Manulife aren't really suited to our grey climate (for half the year) and should never have been built in the style. Place Bonaventure in Montreal is great Brutalism but it's highly problematic too. The Star Building just doesn't rise to greatness. It's cousin, Seneca One Tower in Buffalo, is way better and it's not great either.
 
Even without the concrete, they still use a lot of grey. Kinda nullifies that point if you think about it. /sigh
 
new render from the link
1608326147123.png

1608326175559.png

1608326288321.png

1608326333049.png

1608326365939.png


1608326439107.png
 

Back
Top