The placement of the two vertical columns of unadorned space, with balconies and windows between them on the same plane dividing the building into three sections, and balconies flanking them at the east and west faces of the building, and the floating roof sections hovering above each section, with slight variations in height to the three sections, suggests the hand of someone who knows how to tie all of this together rather pleasingly. There's an almost Uno Prii 77 Elm-like quality to it - spare, and without the decorative elements of course.
 
I'm not terribly impressed with either of the renderings. The curve is nice, but otherwise it doesn't look that great.

The increase in density would be good for the area though.
 
First the Ryerson Photography Gallery and Research Centre and now this - great to see D+S contributing to the revival of this part of town.
 
Why pay to have an architect design this piece of crap when it lacks any redeeming quality? I wonder if companies specifically ask for the architect to make their buildings as cheap as possible and just hope the city won't care.
 
I don't want to rain on your D&S hatefest parade but I like this building, it speaks urbanity. This doesn't mean I like all D&S work (far from it) but this is a good building. It keeps its context in mind.
 
It's Jack Kerouac's Birthday today!

When is Jack Diamond's birthday I wonder?

Ultimately in Toronto it's the client in charge. Take an older (probably 55+) developer who probably knows Diamond's family intimately (it's a small town after all) and a conservative lender (RBC?) and you get this kind of proposal! D+S--as most architects in this town--will do anything to get a gig. Ultimately, the building reflects the developer's personality more than the architect's.
 
The side of the building that matters most - the side that faces Dundas Square - looks like the 22 Wellesley east wall blank out of precast. If we knew that side would be blocked, I wouldn't bother worrying about it, but the HNR building isn't likely going anywhere.

Diamond's glassification of the Image Arts box looks fine, and happy it's being done. But I can't understand why they'd hire Diamond for this dull pile. Why not just get generic pre-cast architect #567?

I'll gladly take even model #3A from Peter Clewes' glass box catalogue over this.

(The railways had catalogues of station designs that were meant to run the range from small whistle-stops to large divisional points - there would be one, one-and-a-half and two-story versions, and 3-5 architectural styles, and some of the little features and embellishments would change over time - only the big cities and the tourist destinations would normally get something very special).
 
Urban Shocker said:
Refreshing to see a tall building in that part of town that eschews the cheap-trick easy-sell curvy thing of the Eaton Centre office towers / Torch / Pantages - and plays off them so nicely.
Click to expand...

Looking at the rendering again I think US has a point here (not about curves in general though, because curves are sexy). Taken on its own the building is fairly uninspiring, imo, but when you consider it in relation to the buildings around it the simplicity of the building works. I'm liking the roof element a little more too, and this to me is where the building can really make its own statement and could be a real stand-out feature as it does rise over the square so boldly. I would only hope that the finishings are of good quality.
 
omg it's just ugly.

reeeeeeeally wish jack diamond can be banished from designing in toronto... that's just horrible! it's so bad, it shouldn't even deserve any redeeming points ppl say. it just doesn't matter. not when it's so badly designed overall.
 
I am a bit confused here now... we have seen renders from G&C as well as D&S architects. (maybe some of you missed the original post on page 1?)Does this mean they are both proposals for the same development - that they are in competition with one another? In that case, the G&C building is far superior!!!! It clearly looks to be a mixed use building... if the W hotel rumour is correct, the lower podium section is likely hotel and the upper section condos. To me the floor heights look different so that is why I draw this conclusion...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top