Toronto Ïce Condominiums at York Centre | 234.07m | 67s | Lanterra | a—A

0.png


1.png
 

Attachments

  • 0.png
    0.png
    2.2 MB · Views: 1,944
  • 1.png
    1.png
    2.1 MB · Views: 1,887
Last edited by a moderator:
From the above article, sums up what we have all known about this city:

“We don’t take the public realm seriously,” he said, on a recent weekday morning at his office in downtown Toronto.

“We don’t invest in it. We don’t think it’s important, collectively …. And I really think that’s tragic.”
 
interesting article. I am surprised that he is such a critic of his own work... or perhaps the parameters in which he has had to work.
 
But for all his success, Mr. Clewes has great reservations about the pace of condo development in the city generally.

In his eyes, many of the towers now popping up through Toronto’s core are depressingly similar.

A “frightening” number of them — about 70% he believes, — are the product of developers who won’t add anything to a project unless it contributes directly to the bottom line. But the real villain, in his view, is the city and its planners, who have a myopic focus on individual lots, instead of entire blocks.

“We’re attempting to codify what a building should be as opposed to what a city should be,” he said.

“And when you codify what a building should be, you start to get a lot of buildings that look an awful lot the same.”
Click to expand...

Interesting.
 
Mongo said:
Interesting.
Click to expand...

See, I thought this was so peculiar given that Charles St will be ruined by three of his buildings that look exactly the same.

Didn't aA also create a cluster of buildings on Bay that all look the same? heck doesn't all of his work look the same?

I don't understand how he can lay blame on the planning department for his boring clinical style of architecture.
 
That Peter Clewes article/video interview was a good read. On that sameness note, it doesn't help how many twin-tower condo projects there are in the downtown core (buildings not necessarily of the same height, but of the same design). This includes Ice among many others. Especially from the Lake, in the years to come when the Financial District's 'MINT cluster' will no longer be visible, what you will see is Concord's City Place and the Signature Towers to the left of the CN Tower, and to the right, the Twin-Tower Oxford Place, ICE Twins, Harbour Plaza Twins, 45 Bay Twins, Success Tower/Pinnacle Centre complex, etc. dominating the skyline.
 
Fair enough twin point. Some are better than others, but do you really think the Oxford towers are going to happen? I rather doubt it. Atleast as planned. I definitely think ice is a good set of twins, they look sharp and impact the skyline in a really good way.
 
steveve said:
That Peter Clewes article/video interview was a good read. On that sameness note, it doesn't help how many twin-tower condo projects there are in the downtown core (buildings not necessarily of the same height, but of the same design). This includes Ice among many others. Especially from the Lake, in the years to come when the Financial District's 'MINT cluster' will no longer be visible, what you will see is Concord's City Place and the Signature Towers to the left of the CN Tower, and to the right, the Twin-Tower Oxford Place, ICE Twins, Harbour Plaza Twins, 45 Bay Twins, Success Tower/Pinnacle Centre complex, etc. dominating the skyline.
Click to expand...

I have high faith the Signature Towers will be built, and should stand out in the skyline. Oxford Towers are very iffy, my guess is that they won't be built as proposed. 45 Bay is a 8 year project by the time both of them get done, considering they haven't even been successful in attracting any tenants I have my reservations about this one too.
 
Wait, 45 Bay has construction starting this summer and I doubt they'll just build the underground parking garage and the bus terminal.
 
stjames2queenwest said:
Fair enough twin point. Some are better than others, but do you really think the Oxford towers are going to happen? I rather doubt it. Atleast as planned. I definitely think ice is a good set of twins, they look sharp and impact the skyline in a really good way.
Click to expand...

My problems aren't with Ice as they are overall very nice buildings, my problems have more to do with the fact that our skyline has become dominated by not just stand alone condo buildings but condo complexes normally ranging between 2 and 3 buildings of deliberately the same if not similar design, intentionally so. I can't exactly blame the developer because From their point of view it makes the most sense to utilize the same design philosophy carried over times two. It's probably just inevitable considering the amount of large spaces open to development right in the downtown core that allow these massive condo projects.
I would have said the financial district is an exception considering for many years that area was contained with its massive office blocks (BA, TD Centre, Brookfield, Royal Bank Plaza) but these multi-tower office blocks are spreading outside of that area with Oxford Place (at least 2 towers) and 45 Bay.
The fact that there are so many twin-tower condo projects make stand outs like ICE blend in to the bunch.
People tend to dislike comparisons between our skyline and the other 'big 2' (Chicago and NY), but when comparing our skylines, the differences become apparent over the lack of 'styles' visible at a glance. Great things don't always come in two. The cheapening.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top