News   Jul 15, 2024
 355     1 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 519     0 
News   Jul 15, 2024
 556     0 

Regency Yorkville (Plazacorp/HiRise, 18s, Turner Fleischer) COMPLETE

From the pics, it looks an awful lot like 1 St. Thomas. Perhaps in real life it looks much worse. That is the problem sometimes with looking at projects on this board. Pics dont always do a building justice, and sometimes they do it too much justice.
 
"They fit in well. No worse than the other buildings in the surrounding area such as Minto Yorkville, Stern Building or Prince Arthur."

At times the chat on this site can be intimidating or, better, enlightening to fellows like myself sans fine arts degree. Fortunately, once in a while, someone drops the ball. Regency as good as Prince Arthur or One St Thomas? Get real.

...

I said it fit in well, I can stand by that, it does maintain the unformity of the streets in Yorkville. - "Dropping the ball, wtf?" I'm an advertising executive, posting my opinion on a message board, not an art consultant writing a review for better homes and living. You are taking the "chatter" on this site a little too seriously my friend.
 
From the pics, it looks an awful lot like 1 St. Thomas. Perhaps in real life it looks much worse. That is the problem sometimes with looking at projects on this board. Pics dont always do a building justice, and sometimes they do it too much justice.

Walked by this development today and the pictures express pretty much the same level of disapointment as the actual site.
 
"Good taste" rather than good design is what historicist stylings are all about - and no amount of "attention to detail" in finishes can upgrade the one to the other.
 
I, honestly, can't find it that offensive, either--even if, for what it does, it isn't Stern-calibre. (Or Clewes-calibre, needless to say.)

It's routine, and a mite fussy, and certainly not "cutting edge", but I wouldn't hyperbolize its demerits, because that's letting the Urban Toronto get to one's head...
 
October 5th Update:

1506796322_c24a28878d_b.jpg
 
wowowow, so fugly! they had to have broken many, many rules of design with this one
 
It might come as a surprise, but some of the purchasers might have bought on the basis of what would be found inside.
 
It might come as a surprise, but some of the purchasers might have bought on the basis of what would be found inside.

i'd say probably most if not all did! can't imagine people buying because of the look if the building from the outside...bnesides the renderings probably made it out to be way more appealing. it's probably quite luxurious inside (it better be for the prices they charged!). too bad it's like a really nice at heart girl that's fat and ugly.
 
With respect to the exterior, I'm with adma on this one. Certainly nothing to write home about, but not hideous, either.
 
It looks a million times better than the run-down, rusted uP strip mall that used to reside on this spot. I went looking through my old folders, and found some pictures I had taken of it before it was torn down:

stripmall3.jpg



stripmall2.jpg



Stripmall1b.jpg



-
 
On its own it's moderately ugly, but in its context I think it fits in just fine. Very few people are even going to notice this building when its finished; in a few years it'll seem like it was always there. That's what building to context is all about.
 
So if the neighbourhood is an ugly jumble, it's best to encapsulate that in each building added to the fray?

42
 

Back
Top