1 Bloor East, DEAD AND BURIED (Bazis, -2s, Varacalli)

[yyzer]

278 m = 912.0624 ft

Trump is supposed to be 925 ft....so it is not impossible that the Post article is incorrect...if Bazis continue to claim that 1 Bloor is Canada's tallest residential....

 

[balmoral]

It strikes me as (sadly) Canadian that when presented with an example of groundbreaking architecture, the most common reaction is "Well, Chicago and New York have a lot of mediocre developments going up too."

The point I, and others, are trying to make, is that these cities are constanly developing higher highs, while we settle for incrementally increasing levels of mediocrity.

Every city has crappy developers that throw up crappy developments. The economics of urban real estate ensure this.

If global real estate investors believe Toronto is underpriced, why has no local developer stepped up to develop a property of global importance?

 

[Canuck]

They at least have dozens upon dozens of old beauties. Toronto doesn't. Toronto looks as though it was founded in the 1960s.

We don't need to compare our stock to Chicago's or NY (especially since there is no comparison), rather let's focus on architecture today and in a few decades from now, we can pride ourselves on our great collection.

 

[syn]

It strikes me as (sadly) Canadian that when presented with an example of groundbreaking architecture, the most common reaction is "Well, Chicago and New York have a lot of mediocre developments going up too."

That isn't the most common reaction to the design though. It's the reaction to people who can't put things in perspective and complain that there isn't enough of this in Toronto.

The point I, and others, are trying to make, is that these cities are constanly developing higher highs, while we settle for incrementally increasing levels of mediocrity.

Toronto is developing higher highs. Not at the rate of Chicago or NYC, but then this isn't Chicago or NYC. The point is that things are getting better and are likely to do so.

Every city has crappy developers that throw up crappy developments. The economics of urban real estate ensure this.

If global real estate investors believe Toronto is underpriced, why has no local developer stepped up to develop a property of global importance?

What exactly does that mean? Is that tower in NYC a project of "global importance" or just a nice hotel/condo/art gallery?

International developers are stepping up and adding to the city. It's not going to happen overnight though.

 

[maestro]

We should be holding international competitions for all new buildings.

dream on brother!


I really don't see any highrises going up in downtown Toronto that are this bad.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=136329&page=2


BTW, What's so great about the Chicago Spire? It's rather obnoxious.

 

[Mystery White Boy]

dream on brother!


I really don't see any highrises going up in downtown Toronto that are this bad.
http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?t=136329&page=2


BTW, What's so great about the Chicago Spire? It's rather obnoxious.

City Place is a joke. Every single one of those buildings.

 

[caltrane74]

dreambrother, I have an idea (eureka!)

The Toronto developments suck (as you and I both know), so you need to tell the city & developers how you feel. I mean really let them know how you feel. And if they don't start making a noticable improvenment in their proposed projects. You need to go back and tell them again and again, exactly what their doing wrong. If that doesn't work, then tell them that Toronto really needs to catch-up with the groundbreaking designs in Chicago & NYC, then maybe they will do something about it, and you will see some up to date designs.

If all your campaigning doesn't bring any results, as a last resort measure, I think you should go to Chicago and NYC and steal their proposals/developments and bring them to Toronto.

And in the end you will be happy, and trust me so will I.

 

[tkip]

Regarding Cityplace

Cityplace is not a joke. Certainly not every single in the project is. That's hardly being objective. True, the streetscape in the first phases could have been better designed but all in all the towers are not bad. Try and keep this in perspective.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

They at least have dozens upon dozens of old beauties. Toronto doesn't. Toronto looks as though it was founded in the 1960s.

Because Toronto was secondary to Montreal until the 1970s. It was a backwater until then.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

Oh I know. But I think I did pick two that are better than anything here.

I don't disagree, though there are plenty of buildings that are perfectly well designed, if less showy.

 

[maestro]

City Place is a joke. Every single one of those buildings.

So an alunimum cladded box over say Apex? Pretty much confirms that a padded room is in your future.

 

[Mike in TO]

278 m = 912.0624 ft

Trump is supposed to be 925 ft....so it is not impossible that the Post article is incorrect...if Bazis continue to claim that 1 Bloor is Canada's tallest residential....

Well Trump isn't built yet, so that is what they are basing it on. Same with Aura and it's claim to be the tallest condo in Canada.

 

[Tewder]

Toronto is not NYC nor is it Chicago.

I agree with half your statement. Why must we resign ourselves to the notion that Chicago is better or has more potential than Toronto?

 

[asiancolossus]

I wonder if this Aura condo news at College Park with the "tallest condo" competition is going to knock the wind out of the sales of 1 Bloor? It seems to be always the latest and greatest that attracts the hype, is 1 Bloor yesterday's news now?

 

[caltrane74]

Tallest "pure condo".