Toronto Velocity at the Square | 122.52m | 40s | HNR | P + S / IBI

maxpower said:
Just wondering, is the precast supposed to match the HNR building's colour?
Click to expand...
I don't think so. They could have specified a similarly coloured precast, but they went with something pinker. Each of the three buildings in the complex now have their own colouration: parsley on mashed potatoes, crème caramel, and mole sauce on poached salmon. As a meal, that's all coming right back up.

42
 
Dark grey and salmon are just not colours that go together. They could work on different buildings but it's beyond me why they combined them here.
 
maybe they bought the cheapest panels they could get in the volume they needed. like deep discount on the lowest demand, sort of bargain bin ones. not joking, builders do this all the time.
 
someMidTowner said:
July 14:

View attachment 81168
Click to expand...

I think this project is more in keeping with New York’s Union Square than Toronto’s Dundas Square. And that might be partly why it seems to draw criticism.

Look at the gray modernism of the Omni building next door, and the gray expanse of Dundas Square in front. This is the Toronto we’re used to. Now look at the project. The heritage elements are actual tall buildings. They actually retain their forms, not just their facades. The new tower has a distinct colour and materiality – warm earth tones and some masonry (okay, pre-cast) – giving it a sense of character that plays off the older portions in a certain way, neither fading into the background nor overwhelming them.

For me, the overall effect is a congenial grouping of old and new, more like the lively, jostling streetscape of Manhattan than the formal modernism favoured by Toronto, where we like to squash little heritage facades with huge gray boxes. So yes – this project just doesn’t fit in here, and maybe that’s why some people are shunning it.
 
I don't think anyone is harping on it for not being grey like everything else. Some warm tones would be welcome, they just aren't applied very well here. To be honest I like the massing and its presence in the square (except that overhang at the top), it's the materials that are lacking.
 
Cityminded said:
I think this project is more in keeping with New York’s Union Square than Toronto’s Dundas Square. And that might be partly why it seems to draw criticism.

<snip>

So yes – this project just doesn’t fit in here, and maybe that’s why some people are shunning it.
Click to expand...
For me, it's the masses of cheap back-painted spandrel walls and relatively small windows that consign this to the offenders list.

Meanwhile, the precast now going up on it near ground level, is actually rather fun:

DSC04705.jpg
DSC04706.jpg
DSC04707.jpg


42
 

Attachments

  • DSC04705.jpg
    DSC04705.jpg
    420.2 KB · Views: 520
  • DSC04706.jpg
    DSC04706.jpg
    291.9 KB · Views: 524
  • DSC04707.jpg
    DSC04707.jpg
    273.5 KB · Views: 521
Cityminded said:
I think this project is more in keeping with New York’s Union Square than Toronto’s Dundas Square. And that might be partly why it seems to draw criticism.

Look at the gray modernism of the Omni building next door, and the gray expanse of Dundas Square in front. This is the Toronto we’re used to. Now look at the project. The heritage elements are actual tall buildings. They actually retain their forms, not just their facades. The new tower has a distinct colour and materiality – warm earth tones and some masonry (okay, pre-cast) – giving it a sense of character that plays off the older portions in a certain way, neither fading into the background nor overwhelming them.

For me, the overall effect is a congenial grouping of old and new, more like the lively, jostling streetscape of Manhattan than the formal modernism favoured by Toronto, where we like to squash little heritage facades with huge gray boxes. So yes – this project just doesn’t fit in here, and maybe that’s why some people are shunning it.
Click to expand...

What are you talking about?

3404886.jpg
 
Cityminded said:
...
Look at the gray modernism of the Omni building next door, and the gray expanse of Dundas Square in front. This is the Toronto we’re used to. Now look at the project. The heritage elements are actual tall buildings. They actually retain their forms, not just their facades. The new tower has a distinct colour and materiality – warm earth tones and some masonry (okay, pre-cast) – giving it a sense of character that plays off the older portions in a certain way, neither fading into the background nor overwhelming them.
....
Click to expand...

I tend to agree.

The heritage building are heavy on vertical elements.
So nix a the usual Toronto Modern style of banded wrap-around balconies - that would clash.
That also eliminates some LEED advantages derived from balcony shading, so on the sides without balconies, they need to use spandrel to reduce vision glass / solar gain.

The heritage buildings are both variations of beige, with the HNR building being quite "warm" in tone.
So nix blue or gray which, despite what some people may think, don't blend with warm colours
(at least not in a heritage context).
I suppose it's an architectural/artistic choice whether to "blend" or "contrast".

But you still need some contrast - can't have a beige tower behind beige heritage buildings.
Hence, the warm dark spandrel and mullions, with a lighter element (pink-ish precast) to tie back to the heritage buildings without being matchy-matchy on colour..
 
Nobody needs to use spandrel glass. People choose to use spandrel glass. Sometimes it works, but for vast expanses there are plenty of other far more attractive options.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top