Toronto Aura at College Park | 271.87m | 78s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

Yeah and Bay street south of queen is uber commerical.

So its ok for it (Bay St) to slack off north of queen to rez.
 
For me it's not so much the less-than-exciting retail on Bay St, it's the less-than-exciting built form of the condos... the way they meet the street.
 
Wow, thanks for that.

I gotta say, I'm still not feeling the love. A tower that, for all its geometry, still manages to be formless, on top of a base that looks like a GM dealership.
 
Thanks for the link.

I think the base really ruins it. I find no fault in the shape of the building, but the base makes it simply a tall building, rather than a building of stature. It ignores the corner almost entirely.
 
Thanks rjeffers, the design really is quite uninspiring - I think it's also an older version as well.

AoD
 
You can't make a silk purse of a skyscraper out of a sow's ear of architectural talent.

ROCP phases one and two, and now this thing, are about as good as we're ever going to get out of Graziani & Corazza I would imagine.
 
Retail behind pillars?!! Yes, this would be bringing Bay St. to Yonge. Terrible base and the tower is a mess.

Bring on new architects please.
 
To paraphrase, "Not ugly, not fugly, not pug fugly, but ugly ugly." Ew. Thank God it got rejected.
 
I think the podium design was an attempt to match College Park. If that is what was being attempted, then it should have been more significant. Nothing really wrong with the tower in my opinion. The two just don't mesh.
 
Why does Canderel stick with Graziani + Corazza through thick and thin? Do they provide cut-rate services? Three buildings for the price of two?

I'd be amused by a system that limited what architectural firms were allowed to design in regards to maximum sizes and heights. Firms would have to prove their worthiness to build anything more than X number of storeys based on past performance.

In my books Graziani and Corazza would be limited to banalities of 7 storeys/25 metres or less. Zeidler would now be under review in the 25 to 50 metre range because of their recent work, (Ryerson Business, Accolade) and would not be allowed to build higher than that, meaning that Trump would be redesigned again.

Anyone wanting to build higher in this city would have to go to aA, Core, Quadrangle, KPMB, Hariri Pontarini, etc., or pick from a select group of international origin.

I would volunteer to sit on the architectural, uh, junta, I am proposing, and would likely bring interesting snacks to the weekly meetings.

42
 
And, as an extension to this process, I move that all underground parking garages must be designed like Eighteenth Century French chateaux - with a mandatory pippypoo and doodad count of balustrades, egg and dart mouldings, fanlights and pilasters

But nothing faux above grade.
 
What idiots we have in our city council, it makes me so mad to see this stupidity. Im pissed that they would refuse this tower. Whats wrong with tall buildings???? Im tierd of this city allowing box or slabs. I think we should let the city know how we feel and make this an election issue!! We want tall point towers, no more 25 story ugly slabs!!!! Get off your asses and visit new york or chicago city council. They have tall buildings and there cities are stunning. Sorry about my rant.
Click to expand...

Okay, "tall point towers" a la Graziani + Corazza, or midrise "slabs" a la, say, One City Hall.

Slabs win.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top