Can't we give 9/11 a rest, people? I can't even remember what this thread was about. Oh yeah, 2 ugly buildings that bear some resemblance to the original WTC towers that were destroyed on 9/1 -- D'oh!
 
Plain designs with uncharacteristic detailing achieve a very important function and that is to lower the cost of construction. It helps to generate the project's required return while keeping listing prices at a lower rate. Keep in mind that there is a school of people, some of whom hold very senior position in realestate development firms, who believe that Toronto's condo market will soon clapse. Therefore it will only be prudent to construct lower cost buildings inorder to hedge aginst a potential down-turn in market demand. Just have to remember that boxes are usually cheaper to design and build than cyclinders.

But once again, I see this as an improvement to the block's current form of existance. And any improvement is good improvement.
 
UD2 said:
Plain designs with uncharacteristic detailing achieve a very important function and that is to lower the cost of construction. It helps to generate the project's required return while keeping listing prices at a lower rate. Keep in mind that there is a school of people, some of whom hold very senior position in realestate development firms, who believe that Toronto's condo market will soon clapse. Therefore it will only be prudent to construct lower cost buildings inorder to hedge aginst a potential down-turn in market demand. Just have to remember that boxes are usually cheaper to design and build than cyclinders.

But once again, I see this as an improvement to the block's current form of existance. And any improvement is good improvement.
Click to expand...

Get some form of spell-checking.

As for "any improvement is good improvement", I strongly disagree. I would rather see the dumpy/seedy mess currently on this site stay around a while rather than settle for something that is outright clumsy and cheap. Your argument doesn't stand up very well.
 
Redroom Studios said:
And Tewder - what happened to you? You used to be one of the most vocal supporters of good urban design. You took some harsh criticism for that and I noticed your views becoming less entrenched which was understandable. But now you've completely given up, switched teams and jumped ship so that you now support poor urban design. I'm confused and disappointed.
Click to expand...

Ouch. I hope I don't come off as supporting bad design, Redroom. It's true though that a more jaded me has come to temper some idealism with the sobering realism of a Toronto context.

In the case of aA and Toronto's slab-tastic design vernacular I am simply conceding that it is what it is. What I would still harshly criticize though would be the quality of materials used and how the base meets the street. Even in a pragmatic Toronto context these things remain fair game for judgement, imo.

... and again, it's not that I don't hold out for an icon here or an inspired gesture/flourish there. I do.
 
Good design can offer a good return to tthe developer by passing along the costs to end buyers, most of whem will pay a resonanable premium. If that wasn't the case we wouldn't have well known architects. Obvious.
 
As I recall 1BE and Aura went through redesigns in part because the city insisted on quality work given the scale of these buildings. We can't permit twin towers of this size (2 X 58) to go ahead unless they are exceptional. Each is the size of a bank building and they stand virtually alone. Arguably they will be the most visible buildings in the city because they are both isolated and central. How owuld Chicago respond to this proposal? Not passively. Frankly I am stunned Lanterra is not looking at something iconic here, like Absolute or something.
 
buildup said:
Frankly I am stunned Lanterra is not looking at something iconic here, like Absolute or something.
Click to expand...

Money...it could easily cost 100 million dollars more to build a couple of 58 storey Absolute/Emerald Park towers than their typical designed glass boxes.
 
$100 million more? Yeah, I don't think so. The bigger problem with Absolute is dividing the round floor plates into useable units for downtown Toronto.
 
maestro said:
$100 million more? Yeah, I don't think so. The bigger problem with Absolute is dividing the round floor plates into useable units for downtown Toronto.
Click to expand...

I think the "$100 million more" was imply a guesstimate. The fact is, we all know better design costs more money and the project as proposed is as absolutely as cheap and banal as it could possibly be. I think this demonstrates the developer’s absolute contempt for the city and displays their complete lack of care or concern for how it develops. They should be treated with as little respect and concern as they have shown this city.

Personally I would rather see the site left as is than watch these a$%holes pillage a part of our city that needs help not more drab concrete.

In response to an earlier comment, I don’t know if they would get away with this in Chicago or not and I don't care. I think developers should be asking themselves is "hey do you think we could get away with this in Toronto?" and be afraid the answer will be no. Instead, they seem pretty sure (given a lot of other crappy developments that have been approved) that they will succeed. And really, who is going to challenge them? If the developer has no moral fibre, this is what you get and our city hasn’t many tools to stop them.
 
From what i understand, both buildings of Absolute cost aprox. 300 million dollars to build, for goodness sake i would hope that a couple of 58 storey, One Bedford/18 Yonge st. or even Murano/Buranos wouldnt be costing more than 200 million to build. I dont know i may be wrong.:confused:
 
Build something better, charge more for it, people will pay. There are countless examples of people paying more for good design.
 
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but I walked by this block today and was surprised to see that a new Vietnamese restaurant will be opening soon in this block and what is especially surprising is that the owners have poured a pile of money into the restaurant. It has a beautiful futuristic all-white sculpted interior. I cannot understand why anyone would make that kind of investment (easily well over $100K) in a restaurant in a block that is soon slated for redevelopment :confused:
 
Peepers said:
I don't know if this has been mentioned yet but I walked by this block today and was surprised to see that a new Vietnamese restaurant will be opening soon in this block and what is especially surprising is that the owners have poured a pile of money into the restaurant. It has a beautiful futuristic all-white sculpted interior. I cannot understand why anyone would make that kind of investment (easily well over $100K) in a restaurant in a block that is soon slated for redevelopment :confused:
Click to expand...

Hmmmm, maybe not so soon.
 
Chicago has and continues to build awful residential designs that dominate their surroundings. I'm a little surprised by the suggestion that the city would not be accepting of this proposal providing height wasn't an issue.

The one that started their boom, One Superior Place, would have never being accepted in Toronto. A giant concrete slab on a massive open air parking podium. It makes NYCC look good.
 
Last edited:
1SuperiorPlace-Aug08-002a.jpg


Get the hint?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top