AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
That and the Scientology building getting restored will do that corner of Yonge a great service.
AoD
Toronto 10 St Mary | 197.73m | 60s | Mattamy Homes | a—A
- Thread starter androiduk
- Start date
That and the Scientology building getting restored will do that corner of Yonge a great service.
AoD
Benito
Senior Member
Marcanadian
Moderator
Well, that could be something.
I do like the about-to-topple-over look. It's way more exciting than buildings that just stand around not threatening to topple over.
42
I do like the about-to-topple-over look. It's way more exciting than buildings that just stand around not threatening to topple over.
42
Tulse
Senior Member
It looks like the "large displaced masses" trend is finally taking over the "wavy balconies" trend in Toronto architecture.
RonThom
Active Member
So creative, this city's architects.
.dwg
Active Member
Do you think multi-residential architects can demonstrate their creativity when on one side the planning department tells them pretty much the exact massing that is permitted on any given site, and clients penny-pinch?
Architects don't get to exercise creativity or "design" in this city - they get to carry out the strict demands of the planning department (who are not trained in architectural design or housing typology) with almost no wiggle room unless they fight doggedly for it.
ADRM
Senior Member
This is wildly hyperbolic.
cd concept
Senior Member
Why don't they push the building back so I can look straight like it was supposed to.
.dwg
Active Member
I speak from experience when I say that the planners nickel-and-dime you on inconsequential minutiae in much the same way clients nickel-and-dime small floor areas to ensure they hit outrageously inflated GFA's. It is not conducive to good architecture.
Koops65
Senior Member
A short video:
RonThom
Active Member
That is perhaps true. And thus the culpability of shit design lies primarily with the client, not city staff. Some architects are smart enough to stay away from the profit-chasing grind and only do institutional work, or are selective about their development clients.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Institutional work has its own challenges.
I don't want to impugn the nobility of architects, but they have to eat too, so 99% of them are out there looking for work from any client who is likely to pay their fees. We simply will never get a great building every time a building goes up, but everyone wants to do good work, no matter their ability, and despite the constraints put on the projects (budget, planning rules, etc.), as they all want to work again. Very few can afford to turn down the big players from whichever sector they specialize in, multi-unit housing or institutional or whatever.
42
maestro
Senior Member
That's true for a large established partnership set up as a design factory. There are also plenty of design architects out there working for themselves without compromising their art. That may involve working and establishing oneself first at one of those design factories.