Toronto Peter Street Condominiums | 129.84m | 40s | CentreCourt | a—A

Torontovibe said:
You're speaking for yourself I assume? I hope so because "fine" is not the word I would use to describe this tower. In fact, the only thing interesting about this tower, is the historic building beside it, which they had plans to use as a video screen/art wall. I hope that is still in the plans.
Click to expand...

Well myself, the architects, the developers, the purchasers, people who appreciate sharp, minimal design in general...etc, etc, etc. Astounding misuse of commas aside, a "video screen/art wall" was/is never part of the plan.
 
ProjectEnd said:
It's simple. Simple is good. This tower is fine.
Click to expand...

I'm so bored by it that I forgot I already wrote the same comment a few days before. The unornamented facade wins the day for efficient construction and economic installation. It looks like it didn't take much effort to design or build. To pull that off is a great skill that people admire. But I'm still not satisfied. I want architecture that enhances a walk down the street--towers that make you think "what a creative person that architect must be--how did he come up with that?" I want distinctive landmark after distinctive landmark and to have it all come together in harmony. Everyone would enjoy that more.
 
junctionist said:
I'm so bored by it that I forgot I already wrote the same comment a few days before. The unornamented facade wins the day for efficient construction and economic installation. It looks like it didn't take much effort to design or build. To pull that off is a great skill that people admire. But I'm still not satisfied. I want architecture that enhances a walk down the street--towers that make you think "what a creative person that architect must be--how did he come up with that?" I want distinctive landmark after distinctive landmark and to have it all come together in harmony. Everyone would enjoy that more.
Click to expand...

When have 'distinctive landmark(s),' each vying for their own attention, ever 'come together in harmony?' When I look at things like Peter Street Condos I think: 'well, at least there are a few good architects working in this damn city...'
 
ProjectEnd said:
When have 'distinctive landmark(s),' each vying for their own attention, ever 'come together in harmony?' When I look at things like Peter Street Condos I think: 'well, at least there are a few good architects working in this damn city...'
Click to expand...

Outside of Teeple I can't think of another local firm that consistently comes up with arresting and unique designs for their projects. HP on occasion.

Any others people can think of? *crickets* Didn't think so.
 
Pier 27? Distillery revitalization? X? Burano? Theatre Park? King Charlotte? Etc. etc. etc. All are unique concepts, beautifully detailed and executed.

Teeple may be able to sketch an interesting form but that only gets one so far.
 
Let me join in on the chorus of supporters for this building - and for the other above noted buildings that aA has produced.
 
ProjectEnd said:
Well myself, the architects, the developers, the purchasers, people who appreciate sharp, minimal design in general...etc, etc, etc. Astounding misuse of commas aside, a "video screen/art wall" was/is never part of the plan.
Click to expand...

I obviously forgot which thread I was in. I was talking about that other grey glass tower known as Pinnacle on Adelaide. They both pretty much have that same dull glass/grey spandrel/boxy look, although Peter Street Condominium probably wins by a hair but Pinnacle has the art wall and that historic building going for it, so I might change my choice, after both open.

At street level, both these buildings will offer what almost all new condos offer and that is a flat glass wall. I can't think of anything worse than a city that's full of flat, glass walls at street level. I guess it's the cheapest way to do retail, since every condo developer in Toronto seems to be doing it. Nothing is more cold and sterile, than a street lined with a glass wall and no decoration or charm at all. It's like being in a low end shopping mall that just keeps going and going. (my version of hell)

As for a building being fine because people are buying it, well I guess that proves that "The Star Of Downtown" was a fine building after all. The consumer is never wrong, I guess. By that standard, Aura is also a roaring success.
 
Sorry if this sounds trollish or provocative but I really think that aA = zZZZZ.

They do glass boxes as well as anyone, but this city just doesn't need anymore glass boxes. We all know by now what a glass box looks like. If you can't remember, just throw a rock somewhere downtown and you'll hit one.

Let's get some diversity happening design wise that matches the ethnic diversity we're justifiably so proud of. Diversity good; monoculture meh.
 
Irishmonk said:
Sorry if this sounds trollish or provocative but I really think that aA = zZZZZ.

They do glass boxes as well as anyone, but this city just doesn't need anymore glass boxes. We all know by now what a glass box looks like. If you can't remember, just throw a rock somewhere downtown and you'll hit one.

Let's get some diversity happening design wise that matches the ethnic diversity we're justifiably so proud of. Diversity good; monoculture meh.
Click to expand...

I agree with you. Snoozefest.
 
ProjectEnd said:
When have 'distinctive landmark(s),' each vying for their own attention, ever 'come together in harmony?' When I look at things like Peter Street Condos I think: 'well, at least there are a few good architects working in this damn city...'
Click to expand...

Bay Street does it well with landmarks like First Canadian Place, Commerce Court (West and North), the TD Centre and Brookfield Place--with the Royal York and Old City Hall bookending the south and north ends respectively. All of those buildings are distinctive landmarks that harmoniously create one of the city's finest and most well known places.

Take a look at U of T's campus. You can have grand landmarks like University College, Soldiers' Tower, Hart House, Trinity College, Gerstein Library, Con Hall, Queen's Park, the ROM and old Vic all together in harmony. That's an enjoyable walk for anyone who enjoys architecture.
 
You think we can afford to replicate the landmark-iality of King and Bay and the U of T everywhere? Not a chance, and that's why you had to resort to using two exceptional circumstances in this city to prove your point. That kind of development only happens in a city's most notable nodes, and cannot be expected on everyday streets. What we need on everyday streets are good fabric buildings with an occasional landmark, and we're getting a good fabric building here.
 
WiddleBittyKitty has it exactly right. Junctionist has carefully selected two sets of buildings: the first, the towers of the most powerful banks in the country with a railway hotel and the city's most important municipal building thrown in for good measure; the second, a collection of buildings which form, in part, the wealthiest university in the country, and has lifted them up as examples of what he expects to see everywhere. Sure it'd be nice to have the budget of your average landmark office tower spent on a background residential building but that's really never going to happen, so why put up the straw man in the first place?

Also interesting is that his first list contains a cruciform box (FCP), a silver box (CC), some black boxes (TD) and two post-modern boxes with stepped hats...
 
At issue was if you can have landmark after landmark in harmony, and I showed that you can. The rest is obiter. Toronto operates on that assumption, which results in less investment in architecture overall. Most districts aren't built with the same resources as on Bay Street or at U of T. They can still have many great buildings with creative flourishes in a harmonious whole--not tower after tower of blandness. This condo is hardly among the worst--it still has two nicely done facades and a quality podium. But the north facade is the kind of dullness that should be avoided even for infill.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top