Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
Key words. In 100 years. We live within the economic realities of today, with practical constraints and solutions that meet the people's needs today, not the aesthetic sensitivities of people in 2114.
good design doesn't have to be more expensive.
Our current design problem is that there is little variation - every new building, barring a new like L, looks largely the same, with the same colour, same all glass cladding and same shape.
it just is amazing how Torontonians hate every judging and dismissing posts about their city, but never hesitate to judge and dismiss other cities.
Are you saying you will rather than Aura over Shanghai tower any day? give me a break. If Toronto did have a Shanghai Tower at 632m, you guys would be all overflown with joy and pride. Shanghai tower didn't imitate NYC at all. There is not a single building in Manhattan that is that tall.
Plus, no matter what you guys say, nobody outside Toronto will know 1 St Thomas, while most would certainly know Shanghai Tower, like it or not.
Why do people have to be so fake?
Re-read my post. Not sure where Shanghai Tower was ever mentioned. Actually, you are the first person in this thread to even mention the 632m Shanghai Tower. My post was extremely clear where I said I would prefer Toronto's blue glassy towers over this which was recently posted and what I was responding to: http://3.bp.blogspot.com/-AjBFC6FmJj...%2B90m%2B6.jpg
If you're not going to read the post correctly, then it's not wise to not reply and bring up other towers that were never mentioned in this thread. It kinda makes your reply look awkward.
Our current design problem is that there is little variation - every new building, barring a new like L, looks largely the same, with the same colour, same all glass cladding and same shape.
There are variations - for some reason you just seem to omit them and make it look as though everything is Pinnacle crap.. Aura, Massey Tower, One Bloor, 88 Scott, Uptown, X tower, 1 St Thomas, Ice and really many others have different shapes and colours (there's more than just greens and blue's too - you have silvers, blacks, whites etc)... Glass cladding is just a product of the time really.. I think the majority of developments in major cities with booms have mostly glass cladding in this day and age. Don't forget the Gehry buildings coming down the pipe.
Actually, I disagree with you that our architecture is lacklustre - really for the period of the boom versus other cities with comparable modern day booms its probably not exactly better or worse on the whole.. .. Also you have to look at some of our strong heritage as well with I.M PEI, Van Der Rohe, Rivell, Stone and some great POMO in Scotia and Royal Plaza so I honestly think you don't give credit where due..
Honestly I think you'd be a lot more complimentary of Toronto if it had a scraper boom when CHI and NYC did and then you'd just be all oogly googly about it... Having said that, Not everything in Toronto is Cityplace so maybe give more credit where due..
There are variations - for some reason you just seem to omit them and make it look as though everything is Pinnacle crap.. Aura, Massey Tower, One Bloor, 88 Scott, Uptown, X tower, 1 St Thomas, Ice and really many others have different shapes and colours (there's more than just greens and blue's too - you have silvers, blacks, whites etc)... Glass cladding is just a product of the time really.. I think the majority of developments in major cities with booms have mostly glass cladding in this day and age. Don't forget the Gehry buildings coming down the pipe.
most of what you said are not built yet, but I can see you point - things are improving.
I agree there are a few good designs, but that sea of monotonous of green glass between Lakeshore and Queen west of University Ave is pretty sickening.
Don't get me wrong - I love all the construction activities and the more vibrancy it will bring to the core (I hope downtown will have half a million people sometime soon!) but most buildings do have very mediocre and forgettable designs.
Not most developments have glass cladding. in Shanghai for example, very few new condo buildings are full glass - I am not saying they are better designed, just that it is not correct that the current glass fetish is a 2010s worldwide thing. It's more like a Canada thing.
in all honesty, if you compare skylines of Toronto and Chicago, Chicago's is a lot more interesting, while ours is dominated by green-grey glass towers that look cheap.
When you look at Toronto you only see what you find to be eyesores and seemingly overlook the good stuff.. Many of the projects I mentioned are built - Aura and ICE are almost complete - 1 St Thomas, Uptown, X Tower are all done.. The biggest difference I see in Toronto and Chicago is that we just don't have the pre 60 heritage they have and we never will. I think the blend of Old and New in Chicago does make it interesting and because it has been around as a skyscraper city longer it has more varied styles and overall the architecture is above - but T.O is still a work in progress..
The boom we had and are having are going to lend themselves to good and bad - it comes with the territory.. What the heck is wrong with Burano - its a sleek, tall and elegant silver glass beauty as far as i'm concerned. Who cares about Maple leave towers - they have ICE right beside them that puts them in their place lol.
Don't get me wrong - I love all the construction activities and the more vibrancy it will bring to the core (I hope downtown will have half a million people sometime soon!) but most buildings do have very mediocre and forgettable designs.
.
You can't have it both ways though - you can't boom to the degree with have and create works of art at every turn - not happening.. We'd have to develop a lot more slowly and basically flip the bird at growth in favour of designs, materials and construction that will be around for 100 years.. Toronto has always been a transformative city that has no bones tearing something down for something new if that is what it takes to move ahead!
Toronto has always been a transformative city that has no bones tearing something down for something new if that is what it takes to move ahead!
I definitely agree with that.
Too many so-call "heritage buildings" essentially have no real historic value yet manage to hinder progress of the city.
For Christ's sake, even the loss of Honest Ed evokes so much sentimental emotions and protests as if it were some sort of gem. That store is simply hideous and I can't wait for it to be demolished and replaced with something more urban. I would tear down half of the houses on Yonge st beween Dundas and Bloor as well that look like sh*t.
Not most developments have glass cladding. in Shanghai for example, very few new condo buildings are full glass - I am not saying they are better designed, just that it is not correct that the current glass fetish is a 2010s worldwide thing. It's more like a Canada thing.
Try living in one of those condos in Shanghai. The quality is nowhere near that of Toronto's condos. There's so much cement and concrete used in those buildings that Shanghai locals have dubbed them "cement forests" due to their hideous look. Why so much cement? Because it's cheaper than glass cladding. Everything in those Chinese condos is about cost and utility.
The prevailing trend with those cement condos that you see in China is that when the buildings are completed, their interiors are completely unfinished. I stayed in a new Shanghai condo that have hallways and elevator corridors with fully exposed pipes and cement. Unlike condo construction in Canada and the U.S., owners typically have to fork out another 15-30% of the condo price just for interior finishing.
I definitely agree with that.
Too many so-call "heritage buildings" essentially have no real historic value yet manage to hinder progress of the city.
For Christ's sake, even the loss of Honest Ed evokes so much sentimental emotions and protests as if it were some sort of gem. That store is simply hideous and I can't wait for it to be demolished and replaced with something more urban. I would tear down half of the houses on Yonge st beween Dundas and Bloor as well that look like sh*t.
What - I was referring to demolishing some Old Buildings and replacing parking lots - not city institutions... Honest Ed's is a Toronto institution that should never be touched... You leave my Yonge Street alone too... Condo's replacing parking lots and 60's slabs good... Yonge Street, Honest Eds - hands off - they are a part of the character of the city!! I bet you want to see the Love Boutique, The Zanzibar and Remingtons torn down too... pfftt
I mean that Brutalist mockery of a building deserved no less than a series of cluster bombs to level it as opposed to a 100 million dollar retrofit... This is the type of crap i'm talking about getting rid of - not Honest Eds lol... It is the most disengaging building in Old Toronto.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
