Toronto 217 Adelaide West | 103.5m | 23s | Humbold Properties | Adamson

Just the right amount of concrete here, it looks quite interesting. Maybe we will start seeing more projects like this now that the amount of vision glass on new construction is restricted?
 
Amare said:
Nice try Kirkor but absolutely No, please dont do this.

I dont mind the brutalism aspect at all, but the puzzle piece like stacking of rectangular boxes really detracts from the aesthetics of this project. If this had the curves of a project like Ice I think this would be 100 times better than this current proposal. Kirkor, dont let me put you into the list of bland architects that many people in this forum are already familiar with (ie: aA, Canderel, etc..)
Click to expand...

Oh boy...
 
The base of the tower is interesting - too bad the stacked boxes concept wasn't carried all the way, it would have looked even more interesting.

One area of concern - the concrete will acquire a patina and it might not look so hot in the future (and if it has to be repaired, it will look patchy in the worst way). Be careful what you wish for.

AoD
 
This is not only the best Kirkor design I've ever seen, but one of the most refreshing and engaging designs I've seen during this boom, period. I love the visual texture that the concrete and blocky floors create. I suppose some credit should go to Humbold for giving Kirkor a mandate to create something ambitious. Now let's just see how they execute it...
 
Amare said:
Nice try Kirkor but absolutely No, please dont do this.

I dont mind the brutalism aspect at all, but the puzzle piece like stacking of rectangular boxes really detracts from the aesthetics of this project. If this had the curves of a project like Ice I think this would be 100 times better than this current proposal. Kirkor, dont let me put you into the list of bland architects that many people in this forum are already familiar with (ie: aA, Canderel, etc..)
Click to expand...

The only way I can make sense of this comment is to assume that you're a big fan of Kirkor's faux historical work, otherwise I can't begin to understand how someone could, first off, equate the works of aA and Canderel (i.e. G+C), then take the further leap that whatever they together represent is somehow inferior to Kirkor's current body of work.
 
Ramako said:
The only way I can make sense of this comment is to assume that you're a big fan of Kirkor's faux historical work, otherwise I can't begin to understand how someone could, first off, equate the works of aA and Canderel (i.e. G+C), then take the further leap that whatever they together represent is somehow inferior to Kirkor's current body of work.
Click to expand...
lol I just realized what I wrote makes no sense. I got aA mixed up with G+C and Canderel some how, (I know thats pretty damn sad). I was trying to equate Kirkor and G+C :p. But what I was trying to say was that if this project had curved stacks (instead of rectangular) and maintained some of the brutalist features it would be a lot better then stacks of rectangular blocks.
 
217 ADELAIDE ST W
Ward 20 - Tor & E.York District

217 ADELAIDE ST W
Proposal for rezoning related to a 56 storey residential building containing a total of 410 condominium units with 4 levels of underground parking
Proposed Use --- # of Storeys 56 # of Units 410
Applications:
Type Number Date Submitted Status
Rezoning 15 177189 STE 20 OZ Jun 19, 2015 Under Review
 
wY4PLqm.jpg


3rCHOqh.jpg
 
I love how it conveniently ignores the massive tower proposed right next door, which has a minimal amount of distance proposed the two.
 
The issue is, however, not with 19 Duncan which is currently providing a 12.1m east face setback and almost meeting the Tall Building Guidelines for tower separation (min. 12.5m from the property line). Kirkor on the other hand are showing 3m to the farthest part of their west building face and .9m to the edges of the 'flares' to the north and south.
 
Will that get approved? I don't understand why they wouldn't follow the guidelines atleast CLOSER. Wouldn't it save them time, effort and money to just start with a reasonable proposal?

I think its an interesting project though and would like to see it built in some similar form.
 
It's entirely up to them. Humbold is free to submit anything they want and gamble on whether they think it will be approved. I would think that CentreCourt's recent failure with Grid at the OMB on this same issue would strike some fear into those otherwise willing to play worse odds in their submissions.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top