Search results

First of all, speaking of people who live in South Core as if they’re low-income people who can nary afford anything more than Walmart is absurd. These people can afford condominiums with waterfront views, can’t they? Second of all, affordability doesn’t justify enormously destructive...

That’s a relief. I hope that’s indeed the case.

Is there no chance that they’d divide the space into a few smaller stores? It’s ridiculous that the space *must* be used for a giant store. Such retail shouldn’t be allowed downtown; there should be maximum width limits.

The picture in the project thread thing at the top shows a street level rendering. And how is it “sanctimonious” to be frustrated about a problematic architecture trend? If that’s what you call sanctimonious, I wish everyone in the world was that sanctimonious.

Yes, exactly. Just think about the best retail in Toronto: West Queen West, Kensington, the Beach, etc. have a diversity in the materials that comprise the structure of retail, creating a formal rhythm to the pedestrian experience; every few metres, it’s a completely different look. I think this...

Yes; this is amazing to see. It's so refreshing for aA to finally go beyond their all-glass approach. I hope they continue to pursue this sort of more-diverse cladding from now on. What a relief.

Ugh, a giant wall of glass makes for awful retail presence.

Precisely. The blind faith for new development is not dissimilar to the out-with-the-old-in-with-the-new mentality that caused so much architectural tragedy in Toronto's history. We need to apply a healthful amount of scepticism especially to projects that destroy beautiful old buildings.

Okay; next time I'll say, “I wish they'd leave this site alone and get another site.”

Yes; I realise that that's how it works. That doesn't preclude me from resenting the fact in this instance.

What’s wrong with a long building? I wish there were more of these lately; I’m so sick of the tiny-tower-sprouting-out-of-a-fat-podium style that’s so popular. Plus, it creates a solid street wall and great density. Ideally the same street wall would consist of multiple buildings all pressed up...

Ugh. It seems so perfunctory, especially at street level. Insultingly simple; more of the “throw glass at the problem†mentality that plagues this city. And must this replace an existing non-short building? If it was at least replacing a parking lot or a one or two-storey building it would...

I largely like it, but is this going to be the next South Core, what with all the blue all-glass buildings?

Yeah, this is bizarre; I’d never heard of it either. Why on earth are they calling it the King High Line? It’s so embarrassing/demeaning to just steal the NYC name.

15 storeys is “overdevelopment” at St. Clair & Avenue?!!

Ha, yeah. Or maybe five banks.

Finally, a tiny bit of non-glass that’s not only on the podium! Although it’s probably too good to be true; it’ll probably end up being brown glass in reality.

Yes, I do, in fact. Why not? If it's because it would look out of place, I don't think that's a good enough reason.

Too much glass. I dearly hope they honour the hope of Stollery's owner that they won't just build another tower of glass.

Why on earth is 42 storeys too tall here? Being so close to multiple subway stations and streetcar lines, it should be as tall as possible. Yes, things west of here are weirdly short. Why should that determine the future of this area? Buildings here need to get taller, saliently the...