Toronto Living Shangri-La Toronto | 214.57m | 66s | Westbank | James Cheng

Redroom Studios said:
the problem with both of Shangri-la and 4S is that neither of them have a face to show on any side... its all a monoculture expanse of glass. But I get it that that is what defines neo-modernism. Give me a good old fashioned building with a defined face any day.
Click to expand...


... Trump toronto!!! - where you never get the same side twice :D

6458475583_c4278f7d28_b.jpg


http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/475-Trump-Tower-Toronto-(Talon-57s-Zeidler)/page534
 
vegeta_skyline said:
Shangri-la turns its face away from University?
No more than the 4 Season's turns it face away from Bay street.
Click to expand...

Shangri-La clearly has two faces, and neither of them look either north or south, whereas the aesthetic of the 4 Seasons is that of a building that presents equal aspects to all four sides, as well as when seen in the round. The two comparison pictures that you post, vegeta_skyline, show the rare, top-to-toe view terminus that the Shangri-La site offers at the jog in University Avenue, and fails to do much with. The 4 seasons site offers neither a top-to-toe view, nor is it a view terminus.
 
I have to say as a non connoisseur of true architecture and speaking solely as an observer commenting on his own opinion, I fine both these buildings beautiful. My personal preference is SL but it is just that, a personal preference. I like that there are different facades on the East and West, and while similar North and South; it presents in my view 3 different aspects to the building. I personally find the view in cals photo from the North end very appealing.
4S presents a very beautiful facade essentially repeated in every direction.
I honestly have to say that these are 2 of the nicest projects in the City of Toronto at present. I can only wish that we have such enlightened conversations in the future about other projects that will be built complaining about which is nicer rather than virtually universally agreeing on how terrible some of the other development is.
 
I'll throw myself into the prefers-Shangri-La camp as well. I actually find the north/south elevations quite appealing, particularly with the way the flared walls of the east/west elevations soften the edges of the building. From what's been unveiled so far I do find the ground level of SL to be a mish-mash, but I still prefer it to the bunker aesthetic that FS seems to have going on
 
Urban Shocker said:
Shangri-La clearly has two faces, and neither of them look either north or south, whereas the aesthetic of the 4 Seasons is that of a building that presents equal aspects to all four sides, as well as when seen in the round. The two comparison pictures that you post, vegeta_skyline, show the rare, top-to-toe view terminus that the Shangri-La site offers at the jog in University Avenue, and fails to do much with. The 4 seasons site offers neither a top-to-toe view, nor is it a view terminus.
Click to expand...

Its true that Shangri-la has multiple faces, but you seem to be suggesting Shangri-la's north face is deficient in some means. View terminus or not the 4 Season's north and south facades are eerily similar to Shangri-la's north and south facades. Would you suggest it too would suffer from the same issues if it was in Shangri-la's stead?

And have you never driven or walked down davenport towards Bloor street? Sure it's not an extended vantage point but the 4 Seasons is very front and center and acts as a gateway to the city along that road.
 
I neve really understood, nor fully appreciated the angled "kink" in the tower until I looked at it from Bloor and Avenue, and then again from College and University. It adds a lot to it's approach to the street. Instead of a sharp wall it almost...leans into the street. When it's singled out in the picture above I'm not a huge fan, but as a whole I love it.
 
I find it interesting that so much was made of the angle on the South side of the Ritz. In fact, if memory serves me correctly, this was a major factor behind those who loved that building. Here we have an element of that incorporated on the East of SL which is obvious from the South and also I believe from the North as well as many other design elements on both East and West.
Also, the "jumble at the base on Adelaide looks better and better as they complete it. I personally appreciate that it is not a block glass wall from Simcoe to University. All in all, I would say this building just keeps getting better and better and I would venture to say wins "architecturally" from my point of view at least of the 4 condo hotels. I reserve my final opinion until 4S and Trump are fully ready but I can genuinely say that I believe 4S and SL will be my 2 favorites with likely SL the ultimate winner.
 
vegeta_skyline said:
Its true that Shangri-la has multiple faces, but you seem to be suggesting Shangri-la's north face is deficient in some means. View terminus or not the 4 Season's north and south facades are eerily similar to Shangri-la's north and south facades. Would you suggest it too would suffer from the same issues if it was in Shangri-la's stead?
Click to expand...

Taking Shangri-La as a whole, it has two main faces ( east and west ) that make some sort of Big Statement, and two faces that look as if they're leftovers - as if the designer wore himself out in the effort of designing the two swanky sides. So, as an entity, the building lacks the coherence of 4 Seasons, just as it lacks the coherence of other apparently simple rectilinear towers such as the TD Centre and Pei's Commerce Court, or buildings such as the Manulife tower and Scotia Plaza where there's a definite sense of an "end-on" aesthetic that has logic and works as part of a whole.
 
As for the base - a funny shantytown of odd little angles where the tower meets that jumble of try-too-hard podium shapes, and surface cladding materials - there is so much going on, and for so little reason.

I think the most pleasing part of the whole building, at street level, is the rather grand canopied loading bay ( or whatever it is ) on Simcoe Street.
 
Urban Shocker said:
As for the base - a funny shantytown of odd little angles where the tower meets that jumble of try-too-hard podium shapes, and surface cladding materials - there is so much going on, and for so little reason.

I think the most pleasing part of the whole building, at street level, is the rather grand canopied loading bay ( or whatever it is ) on Simcoe Street.
Click to expand...

I must disagree. For the most part, I love this building's podium. However, the incorporation of that restored old house seems forced. They should've just knocked it down and continued the contemporary design throughout the whole podium.

Historical building guidelines: Placing nostalgia over functionality/aesthetics since the late 1990s -.-
 
I like this building but considering the energy use of a building that is pretty much all windows, your claim of "functionality" (by whose definition?) is certainly a bit less than neutral.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Thanks for the pics, UD. The fact that Shangri-LA blocks the view of Trump from Queen street west is a major plus in my books.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top