steveve said:
But the LED strip being non-operational is a tragedy :(
Click to expand...

That they have also still been unable to illuminate the building's branding at the top ("TRUMP") and still be missing the "P" on the north side ("TRUM ") one year after it's official opening (15 months after the "soft" opening) is.... another tragedy. :rolleyes:
 
Last edited:



Wow, that is just unspeakably ugly. Just when you think it couldn't get any worse. Outside of the fact that they look like two giant staples, why are they also different thicknesses and widths? And why are they so wavy and irregular looking? The sooner this thing gets a reclad the better. Maybe we should start a Kickstarter campaign.


 
Yeah I won't lie, I've tried to look at this building with as little bias as possible and a positive view, but those two extruding balconies could have been done way better. Unnecessary in the first place, thedeepend is right, could they not at least make them the same? One or two small setbacks would have helped this building tremendously. I just didn't expect it to end up looking so unfinished. The southern side posted by wmedia is probably the most lacking.
 
I like this building overall, but I'll admit, that definitely isn't the most attractive angle.
 
I agree those balconies look like a bizarre afterthought, and the lower east wall (not pictured) is inexcusable, but overall (for me) this building is much more than the sum of its parts.

Are there things I would change? Most definitely!
Would I erase the building from existence? Definitely not.
 
Last edited:
Kickstarter campaign

How about snding this pic's To Adam Vaghan ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Public Art

AHK said:
Why? Trump is not Adam Vaughan's ward. Ward 20's eastern boundary is University Avenue.
Click to expand...

Thank you for correction , regarding Adam Vaughan ward boundary.
But my point is about Talon's commitment toward the City
to install the public art feature... Do they obligated to do it or not?
 
I think they are obligated, and it will come. Eventually.
I've said it before and I'll say it one last time, lighting features should not be public art features. I like lighting features but I'd rather see something more permanent and interactive - and art that employs & showcases local artists.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
I think they are obligated, and it will come. Eventually.
I've said it before and I'll say it one last time, lighting features should not be public art features. I like lighting features but I'd rather see something more permanent and interactive - and art that employs & showcases local artists.
Click to expand...

this may sound like a stupid idea, but I think it would be kinda cool if a person were to touch the base of the spire and send some sorta light pattern shooting up the spire lol (no innuendo intended)
 
That strikes me as a great idea Steveve.

I'm not against lighting elements as public art, but there needs to be money in kitty for repairs when required. Non-function of the art should be considered a breach of contract/zoning amendment/building permits with the City, and there should be a remedy spelled out by the contract to get the art functional again, or replaced.

42
 
interchange42 said:
That strikes me as a great idea Steveve.

I'm not against lighting elements as public art, but there needs to be money in kitty for repairs when required. Non-function of the art should be considered a breach of contract/zoning amendment/building permits with the City, and there should be a remedy spelled out by the contract to get the art functional again, or replaced.

42
Click to expand...

Such as the feature atop The Met at Carlton & Yonge that hasn't worked since late fall/early winter.
 
Finally replacing the mismatched glass?

dsc02131a.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top