Oct 17, 2020

20201017_095609.jpg
20201017_095713.jpg
20201017_090138.jpg
 
I do like the angle, the slant at the podium level, the arches, plus the warm tone of this as opposed to the omnipresent green/blue/greys that are all the rage.
 
What a difference 50% windows to 50% column spandrel etc looks on this skyline. As you can see in the photos up above. We need more balance on the top part of the skyline too much glass !
 
Amare said:
A nice touch of warmth in a sea of visually depressing, soul-sucking cluster of buildings which this city has an infatuation of allowing to be built.
Click to expand...
How could / would the city prevent those buildings from being built? Leaving beside the absurdity of your 'infatuation' qualifier, of course...
 
ProjectEnd said:
How could / would the city prevent those buildings from being built? Leaving beside the absurdity of your 'infatuation' qualifier, of course...
Click to expand...
That's an interesting question. So I presume even if the city determined all those building sucked donkey turds design wise, they really have no way of stopping those buildings from being built if they meet all the planning and safety protocols. Or they would have long been stopped. And presuming as well, if said city doesn't have a poor sense of good design to begin with.
 
ProjectEnd said:
How could / would the city prevent those buildings from being built? Leaving beside the absurdity of your 'infatuation' qualifier, of course...
Click to expand...
Im not saying they could prevent them all, i'm saying they could put pressure/influence the materials that are used through the powers they have. Instead of you know, having the same monotonous grey spandrel laced builds we see repeated X times everywhere.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Ok. How?
Click to expand...
Various methods chief amongst them: tax break schemes.

One example could include redirecting the money that the city pisses away with the IMIT program, and use it to credit/give grants to developers who incorporate unique materials in their builds. Clearly the province couldnt care less to force developers do it, so the onus is on the city to find a method within their scope and powers.
 
So what is a 'unique' material? How is that defined?

I'm not trying to come across as an asshole, I'm just trying to help you understand how nebulous and difficult it is to define 'quality' when it comes to development.
 
ProjectEnd said:
So what is a 'unique' material? How is that defined?

I'm not trying to come across as an asshole, I'm just trying to help you understand how nebulous and difficult it is to define 'quality' when it comes to development.
Click to expand...

Nebulous like a design review panel (of over-worked 'experts')?

Clearly what is needed is a city/province-funded UrbanToronto poll to filter master-plans, architecture and builds (incl. materials).
 
ProjectEnd said:
So what is a 'unique' material? How is that defined?

I'm not trying to come across as an asshole, I'm just trying to help you understand how nebulous and difficult it is to define 'quality' when it comes to development.
Click to expand...
By "unique" materials in this case, they could start by targeting colours. For example, a tax incentive/credit for not having developments that are 100% clad in grey, or blue, or green. If need be, designate some kind of minimum percentage necessary in order to receive the credit.

The scope could be expanded to include any other kind of language that can make more developers comprehend we need to see more than just dulling everlasting Toronto architecture style of grey.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top