Bjays92 said:
Definitely not Roger's, they're the anchor tenant for another major downtown office building I'm pretty sure.

I doubt it will be a bank or telecommunications company.
Click to expand...

Telus' lease is up, Rogers just sold their office on the North side of Bloor, RBC is in 5 different towers, Bell has no major downtown presence ..
I think it could be any of these unless you have intel on Rogers moving elsewhere.
 
this is pretty bleak without the accent colours on the cores.

8AA084BD-6356-4F25-AB8B-442601C393B8.jpeg
 
DavidCapizzano said:
this is pretty bleak without the accent colours on the cores.

View attachment 225019
Click to expand...

It is an elevation for a site plan approval which doesn't concern interior design, not a render. The core is not going to be monolithic grey, they just wouldn't show the stone in this type of drawing, or lighting, or any other details really. The green is used to contrast where the glass is and isnt without changing the line weights on the drawing. The glass will almost certainly be clear clear low iron.

Itll be fine. Maybe still bleak! but not like what is shown here.
 
The modernist Bell Canada Building at 76 Adelaide West and the Art Deco Bell Telephone Building at 63 Temperance should count as a downtown presence
 
A lot of you are forgetting that Rogers Stirk Harbour is largely about the details. The project likely won't feel "stark" if you have an appreciation for the way things are handled up-close. Walking past the building you'll likely get an impression of quality and refinement of the small features - how surfaces meet one another, the materials used, how things align. I have no concerns about that with regards to this project. My main concern is that ridiculous antenna in the latest SPA submission.
 
.dwg said:
A lot of you are forgetting that Rogers Stirk Harbour is largely about the details. The project likely won't feel "stark" if you have an appreciation for the way things are handled up-close. Walking past the building you'll likely get an impression of quality and refinement of the small features - how surfaces meet one another, the materials used, how things align. I have no concerns about that with regards to this project. My main concern is that ridiculous antenna in the latest SPA submission.
Click to expand...

Yeah I am getting pretty tired of the mantra on this forum that I should somehow be cool with boring designs just because the architect knows how to detail cladding (oh my god groundbreaking look at that seam here's your god damn RIBA trophy)

95% of what you just said won't make a single difference to 95% of people who either pass by or use this building, and that is a shame. This is barely RSH - this is milquetoast RSH at best. I said the same thing in the Eaton Centre thread - the design literacy level on this forum is way above the average person, and regardless of the talent involved in the firm, it is extremely obvious that this is a bleak and timid effort on all parts.

CIBC Square was supposed to be incredible, and it's green. The Well was supposed to be incredible, and it's green. I'm going to need a bit more to go on than just "But the details!"
 
DavidCapizzano said:
Yeah I am getting pretty tired of the mantra on this forum that I should somehow be cool with boring designs just because the architect knows how to detail cladding (oh my god groundbreaking look at that seam here's your god damn RIBA trophy)

95% of what you just said won't make a single difference to 95% of people who either pass by or use this building, and that is a shame. This is barely RSH - this is milquetoast RSH at best. I said the same thing in the Eaton Centre thread - the design literacy level on this forum is way above the average person, and regardless of the talent involved in the firm, it is extremely obvious that this is a bleak and timid effort on all parts.

CIBC Square was supposed to be incredible, and it's green. The Well was supposed to be incredible, and it's green. I'm going to need a bit more to go on than just "But the details!"
Click to expand...
Well, in case you are one of those that think Dubai architecture would be what we should aspire to in Toronto:

I.DO.NOT.WANT.ANYTHING.LIKE.THAT.HERE!
 
DavidCapizzano said:
Yeah I am getting pretty tired of the mantra on this forum that I should somehow be cool with boring designs just because the architect knows how to detail cladding (oh my god groundbreaking look at that seam here's your god damn RIBA trophy)

95% of what you just said won't make a single difference to 95% of people who either pass by or use this building, and that is a shame. This is barely RSH - this is milquetoast RSH at best. I said the same thing in the Eaton Centre thread - the design literacy level on this forum is way above the average person, and regardless of the talent involved in the firm, it is extremely obvious that this is a bleak and timid effort on all parts.

CIBC Square was supposed to be incredible, and it's green. The Well was supposed to be incredible, and it's green. I'm going to need a bit more to go on than just "But the details!"
Click to expand...

I don't know about mantra. There is certainly frustration when quality, subtle designs is boring but gaudy and cheap are often venerated because of the impression of being different. I'm not sure what you mean by green. IMHO, Glass colour is not a good reason to disparage a design. I could be very wrong. My impression of your post is your typical box vs not a box diatribe.

The removal of colours from the lobby are superficial to the overall package. This tower didn't go from good to bad.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top