Re: We can't expect more?
alklay:
The Toronto Shangri-La is one of several international locations for this hotel chain. I didn't make the opera house comparison, others did, and have made apples vs. oranges comparisons between it and the commercial towers that include Shangri-La.
Unlike the Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts, Shangri-La is not funded with public money and private donations, it is not a cultural institution committed to excellence, and it is primarily connected to the city as an employer of locals. If construction goes wildly over budget we may never hear of it, and neither the government nor local philanthropists will bail it out, so it can never be a particularly "Toronto" building required to be "on budget" in the same way that the Four Seasons Centre was.
It falls into the category of big commercial towers that happen to be here, in Toronto, but from a design point of view could surely fit into big cities anywhere. It could never be described as "modest" or "simple" by virtue of its commercial purpose, where modesty and simplicity aren't seen as virtues, so it couldn't be a "Toronto" building in the sense tudararms meant when he evaluated the merits of the Four Seasons Centre.
I'm sceptical of the claim that, because Shangri-La, the Ritz, and the office tower next to it have glass box podiums this references the opera house or the Film Festival Centre and makes them "Toronto" buildings too. Though, in a way, it's flattering to think they feel they must do that in order to fit in with our established local aA/KPMB/Diamond+Schmitt style.