Was in town last weekend and had walked by this building. The material that was used to frame the top of the first floor/bottom of the second floor, facing the street reminded me of laminated wood; the type used to construct modern indoor furniture. Some of the panels had holes that were drilled into them but unused/unfilled, so I was able to look up into them and the material appeared like...cardboard. I am unfamiliar with construction materials so could be completely wrong here, but it would seem the materials used for the OUTSIDE may not be durable. What happens if the outside fails prematurely? Would the developer be responsible? Or would that fall under Tarion? Or would owners need to pony up an assessment? Given Toronto's high R/E prices, I'd think owners rightfully expect high quality materials and strict attention to details (fill up those drilled and unused holes).
 
From the weekend. I forget about the great southern views from the AGO.

IMG_2487.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_2487.JPG
    IMG_2487.JPG
    452.6 KB · Views: 783
ADRM said:
Holy crap, I'd never seen that. Yuckers.

Wouldn't look out of place along that awful Bay St. canyon from St. Joseph-ish to Gerrard-ish.
Click to expand...
Yeah, I agree. Though I oddly like that canyon there. There's something oddly impersonal about it, which in this particular case I like. In fact, most of the Bay St. feels that way to me, and I often find i take it when heading south more than Yonge. It's wide and yawning but also empty; it's neat.
 
Miscreant said:
Yeah, I agree. Though I oddly like that canyon there. There's something oddly impersonal about it, which in this particular case I like. In fact, most of the Bay St. feels that way to me, and I often find i take it when heading south more than Yonge. It's wide and yawning but also empty; it's neat.
Click to expand...

Ha! Definitely with you on the assessment but agree to disagree on the emotional response!
 
ADRM said:
Ha! Definitely with you on the assessment but agree to disagree on the emotional response!
Click to expand...
The wisdom of my years suggests to me then that this matter can not be adjudicated further. I'm happy to settle.

Alright, I'm lying: I'm tempted to chalk my response up to something more tractably cognitive, but who needs an internet fight. Back to 'scrapin. ;)
 
Why all the hate? The stacked box design is distinctive. The coloured glass tops look great when lit up. The way it meets the street is somewhat anonymous at present, but the storefronts look like they'll be more engaging to walk by than the monotonous expanses of glass that are common along condo podiums at street level. This complex has character, even though it doesn't compare favourably with recent projects in the vicinity like Shangri-La and Theatre Park.
 
I don't mind it except for awful green tone of the glass and the abundance of mullions.
 
junctionist said:
Why all the hate? The stacked box design is distinctive. The coloured glass tops look great when lit up. The way it meets the street is somewhat anonymous at present, but the storefronts look like they'll be more engaging to walk by than the monotonous expanses of glass that are common along condo podiums at street level. This complex has character, even though it doesn't compare favourably with recent projects in the vicinity like Shangri-La and Theatre Park.
Click to expand...
The building is dull in color and cluttered with an ungodly amount of cheap looking mullions(?) ... well, whatever the grey aluminum looking bars are everywhere. The colored boxes on top are not terrible, but they also have a very cheap look about them. But the most offensive element is the street level portion. As bad as the street level appears in photos - it's much worse in person. The entire block around this building is dead and I cannot see how it will improve due to how it is designed. Normally you expect a new building to improve the area in some regard, but this has done the opposite. You now have this dead wall on four sides that you have to walk past to get to other places.
 
Last edited:
Hmm I must admit these are not my favourite but they are better than most of the other entertainment district towers. The towers' shape is distinctive, the mechanical light feature does not look cheap.
It looks like a Piet Mondrian painting which is particularly fun when viewing from the barnacle at the AGO at night. Though I think the street level along Richmond st is a bit tacky I appreciate the splashes of colour, it definitely has injected more pedestrians on that stretch of Richmond and a gallery space for OCADU is pretty decent in my books. Better than a dry cleaners or an empty space

I do hate the grey silver mullions though
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top