Search results

(I loved that photo...but I realize it is placeholder picture for the sale of the site)

To the individuals who like (or at least state that we should put up with it) the trash that is 375 King and Peter & Adelaide, this project is decent architecture. There does not have to be any false choices involving "green glass buildings" or "every building doesn't have to be spectacular"...

I can perhaps see the reason for changing the name (licensing issues and use of a name, etc). But why even remove Gehry's name (the most famous architect in the world, and surely good marketing and justification for a premium sales price) from a description of the project? It really does not...

Neither. Why do I have to like this if I dislike cheap Concord buildings. This makes no sense. Bad and cheap architecture is bad and cheap regardless of "80% of the condos out there" or Concord. Why make excuses for this building? It does not deserve it.

Sorry, I rarely ask construction questions like this: what is the course forward for construction at this point. There was that recent big pour but it looks like new forms and rebar are calling out for another pour in the near future. Are we looking at another few big pours or can concrete be...

This is so depressing to look at. A terrible building that absolutely cheapened out (in both materials and in design) in such a prominent part of the city. There ought to be a law!!

There is lots of potential here. Although the renders have a bit of sci-fi feeling to them (especially as this is Toronto we are talking about), the design firm is amazing and I suspect that we will get a lot of 'out of the box' buildings (for Toronto). This is a damn good thing for the...

Yonge and Bloor is arguable the most dramatic location for a flagship store in the city.

Apple is in Fairview Mall for goodness sakes (no disrespect to Fairview, but....). The idea that this location is surrounded by "low end tenants" is laughable.

Yes, I am sorry but I am having the same reaction as a lot on this forum: this is amazing. And this will never get built as rendered. This looks waaaay too expensive to be a completed as the rendering shows. The engineering and materials needed for that podium, as rendered, are probably not...

"Enough of the skyline-genital-measuring-contests." Amen. (best line of the week)

You probably won't see much of the tower, if any at all, while standing in Yonge Dundas Square anyhow.

Thanks for the pics. I really like the base of this building and think that it does a fine job of adding to the streetscape (and improving it. As for the what retail elements end up here, is another topic. I am just discussing form). And yes, like so much of the public realm in the city...

No offence, but I do not get these posts about "this belongs on the waterfront". Good buildings belong everywhere: The waterfront and on Yonge Street and in North York and in Thornhill. (one could even argue that more people see buildings in the city, than on the waterfront or from the...

That streetscape is just so awful.

🎵I've got rhythm, 🎵I've got spandrel, 🎵I've got grey tones. 🎵Who could ask for anything more?

To think that Diamond Schmitt used to be one of the city's great architectural firms.

This may end up looking worse than, dare I say it, Aura. Won't anyone think of the children (who have to look at both of these buildings)?

And why would two totally private buildings have a connection to each other? It would serve no purpose. You would not be allowed into the other building anyhow.

Well there is a high standard: "far from the worst in Toronto". That is kind of like some of the other excuses we hear like "its better than the buildings around it." Sorry, but bad is bad. And the more bad we get, the worse the city becomes as a whole.