Toronto 88 Queen | 167.35m | 52s | St Thomas Dev | Hariri Pontarini

[stjames2queenwest]

That would look great on spadina.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Well if you're willing to go that far Donald, why not the whole way?

https://chinarchitect.files.wordpress.com/2014/05/tianzi-hotel-langfang-china.jpg

 

[Armour]

I like your reasoning. We don't have much of this either, lets fix that!

Wanting to see a design that is not extant in Toronto doesn't mean he would necessarily approve of anything that is different. I think he just happens to like this particular prospect, which happens to be out of the ordinary in this city.

 

[stjames2queenwest]

Perfect! Those will look great reflected in every aA building in the city. You are on to something.

 

[DSC]

I make it 60 floors, with the bottom two floors apparently being double-height.

At DRP yesterday they said 58.

The DRP - where it was presented as a' concept' and the DRP discussion was a Workshop - gave this one a 'good try now go away and try a bit harder". They suggested that the loading docks etc should all go underground, that the central 'lane' should be narrower so that the sidewalks on Dalhousie and Mutual can be wider, thought that the two shorter towers looked too much like one tower and they did not like the height of the tallest tower. They certainly liked certain aspects of the project but clearly wanted to see more work done on it and urged the City to study the area so that the developers know what kind of a neighbourhood they are building for/in.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Thanks for the report DSC, appreciate it.

Personally, the issue isn't the density - it's the quality of what's being proposed. Would you really trust P+S to execute a HdM/pre-simplification Picasso/Teeple Gansevoort? Look at that proposal - the ensemble is a hot mess as it is.

AoD

 

[Automation Gallery]

The DRP - gave this one a 'good try now go away and try a bit harder".

Off course as usual, they are looking at more of this crap


and less of this stuff

 

[stjames2queenwest]

i would much rather p+s not be involved. They get too much work. I'm not supporting them as a firm. I just like the design. Teeple or s+p would do it better. No question there

 

[Transportfan]

Hmm? approx 58 storeys ehh, dont know if that ll fly in the east-end

It's only #88. Not that far east.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

yeah - not sure I'd call Church and Queen the "east-end"

 

[Solaris]

Taste based on wow factor. Only thing I can come up to explain anyone choosing this garbage over any of aA's work.

lets not forget another quality project with aA modern architecture:

 

[ProjectEnd]

It's true, aA should do quite well with the restoration and office addition. Whether P+S can match that quality with their residential towers remains to be seen.

 

[maestro]

aA has one of if not the best reputation for quality design. They can be repetitive and banal but, so too is every architect in the city. I see no reason to single them out. I fear the tastes of those that do.

 

[maestro]

lets not forget another quality project with aA modern architecture:

You don't like the commercial building? The towers are indeed crap but, they aren't aA.

 

[stjames2queenwest]

I fear for those who just want more of the same.