A different comparison point might be Parkin's Sun Life on University Avenue, whose dynamite-plunger service penthouse was purportedly a modernist response to Big Daddy Gardiner's urbanistic preferences (reflected in the Bank of Canada next door, among other things)
 
Urban Shocker said:
The point - as mentioned earlier - is that in a residential Mies-homage such as X, there's no reason for the knobby rooftop thingy to be disguised at all ... since Mies didn't hide them on his residential towers either.
Click to expand...

The REAL point is WHICH of Mies design Clewes was paying homage to.

Specifically in this case it was the commercial projects like TD Centre or Seagrams in New York.

If Clewes was emulating a residential building of Mies I could see your point. However, the theme is designed to evoke ONE correlation and that is to the classic international style of his commercial buildings. So for that reason it should have been followed to its natural conclusion: Cover the mechanical penthouse please.
 
Of course there needs to be a mechanical box of some sort atop the building. But it doesn't need to be plopped on like an afterthought that has nothing to do with the overall design of the building. I know you see them everywhere else but it's particularly unfortunate in this case because the whole building emanates a sharp sleekness and sexy design... until that clunky oversized box showed up.

I was looking at X from several blocks away at Charles and Bay yesterday and couldn't help but think it really is a bit of a sore thumb on an otherwise excellent new addition to Toronto.
 
I really don't mind the mechanical box, but what bothers me is that it could have been hidden so easily.
 
Peregrine said:
The mechanical demands of a residential tower are considerably different from a commercial tower. Consider the additional quantity of hot water, for example, and the boiler(s) required to store it. Consider also the 24/7noise from chillers/blowers/boilers/elevator machinery and the need to isolate this noise from residents (particularly when they're sleeping) Voila!...the roof mechanical placement.
Click to expand...

Not true.

As discussed earlier, Spire a residential building also designed by Clewes has its mechanical penthouse flush with the exterior walls of the building.

However this was achieved for Spire, it could be done for 'X".

Period
 
There are plenty of condos which, to varying degrees of success, design the mechanical penthouse into the building to be more pleasing to the eye. It's not the end of the world but X (and Murano) get a fail here.
 
Traynor said:
If Clewes was emulating a residential building of Mies I could see your point. However, the theme is designed to evoke ONE correlation and that is to the classic international style of his commercial buildings. So for that reason it should have been followed to its natural conclusion: Cover the mechanical penthouse please.
Click to expand...

Clearly, it steals from both - an homage to a famous local landmark ... and a subtle nod to how Mies designed his residential towers.

We want it all. We deserve it all. We get it all. The Great Man, Mr. Clewes, never faileth.
 
Well, maybe it could have been some glow-in-the-dark something else other than a prosaic mini-Mies. Hey, if they're up to doing that pixellated boogie-woogie colour effect in the spandrels, any judicious solecism'll do...
 
adma said:
Well, maybe it could have been some glow-in-the-dark something else other than a prosaic mini-Mies. Hey, if they're up to doing that pixellated boogie-woogie colour effect in the spandrels, any judicious solecism'll do...
Click to expand...

Huh? You must be a killer at scrabble :p
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top