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

There's lot of buildings with interior balconies. Village by the Grange, the Merchandise Building, and High Park Lofts all have balconies facing an interior courtyard, don't they?
 
Interior balconies? No thanks. It would be like living in an echo chamber. One partier on a single balcony would ruin everyone else's peace and quiet.
 
AoD:

Those all follow a similar concept (Jin Mao and Burj al Arab have atria [atriums?] instead of an open air core, Rotterdam Market Hall is sideways and I am not sure those are balconies) I am basically talking about a giant paper towel roll, with some type of balcony-free glazing on the outside and a massive open air atrium of balconies on the inside, rooms stairwells and elevators in between. I'm sure someone has done something that more or less fits that description, I just haven't seen it yet.

Thernan: I would think that having hundreds of other balconies facing towards you would discourage any rowdy behavior. Also, if designed well, the positioning of the balconies could break up the movement of sound waves, like egg carton shaped foam in a recording studio.

Ok way too off topic now. Lets get back to arguing about Aura.
 
Last edited:
someMidTowner said:
Thernan: I would think that having hundreds of other balconies facing towards you would discourage any rowdy behavior. Also, if designed well, the positioning of the balconies could break up the movement of sound waves, like egg carton shaped foam in a recording studio.
Click to expand...
No it wouldn't. People suck.
 
Great photos! as i was saying befor it appeared as if Aura would top out well above Scotia... i ment by that angle looking south not as fact but obviously its clearly only slightly under kpmg. at least it appears that hieght in this photo above.
 
So I've just noticed that the horizontal, silver banding on the window-wall is now every floor on the north side of the tower...

caltrane74 said:
9140219816_ba455002d7_b.jpg
Click to expand...

... But completely absent from the south elevation. That's an, er, interesting choice.

steveve said:

DSC_0155 by stevevephotostream#1, on Flickr
Click to expand...
 
It's all making sense now. ;) Were any of these features noticable on the model in the sales office? I wonder if they've added or removed or changed any minor architectural features only after the onset of construction?
 
Xray_Crystal_Junkie said:
So I've just noticed that the horizontal, silver banding on the window-wall is now every floor on the north side of the tower...



... But completely absent from the south elevation. That's an, er, interesting choice.
Click to expand...


I noted that a dozen or so pages back. It's a dog's breakfast this building, and the curtain wall really is not helping. This is the city's tallest disaster in the making, and on so many levels. Canderel just shouldn't be allowed to build in the city anymore, I say pull the wool out from under their 460 Yonge project before another one of their cheap-ass eyesores go up.
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
I noted that a dozen or so pages back. It's a dog's breakfast this building, and the curtain wall really is not helping. This is the city's tallest disaster in the making, and on so many levels. Canderel just shouldn't be allowed to build in the city anymore, I say pull the wool out from under their 460 Yonge project before another one of their cheap-ass eyesores go up.
Click to expand...


and about two hundred pages back, i had waves of abuse hurled my way for predicting that this building was going turn out exactly as you've described it. you know, back in the days of:


thedeepend said:
i'll leave aside the fact that you seem to be misusing the word 'parody'. in other words, i wont ask the question: who am i a parody of?

anyway, it actually it only takes a few seconds to document the appallingly sloppy construction of this thing. its being banged together like a tree fort. essentially all you do is just point your camera anywhere and you find things that are wrong with it. you don't even have to look through the viewfinder.

but anyway, you are right on one point. i am quite happy to do anything i can to publicize the deficiencies of the vertical cow patties of Canderel/G+C. we can only hope that enough people in the city become enlightened enough to finally say: you know what? enough already with these badly built, badly designed, embarrassingly ugly clunkers. please, leave our city alone.
Click to expand...

thedeepend said:
you underestimate how angry some of us are that a building of this appalling quality and size has been deposited like a gigantic cow patty in the heart of downtown. further, some of us are extremely annoyed at the fact that a developer feels they can justify putting up a 78 story monstrosity in downtown Toronto without employing a real architect. and don't tell me that Aura was subjected to “Toronto's first ever, international architectural peer review process†all you need to do is look at the photos of the retail spaces and the podium that have been posted to know that the city has been shamelessly duped.
Click to expand...
 
thedeepend said:
and about two hundred pages back, i had waves of abuse hurled my way for predicting that this building was going turn out exactly as you've described it. you know, back in the days of:
Click to expand...

Well, you called it!
 
To me the main failings of the building are in the details, most egregiously in the be-mullioned windows. If this building had a sleeker envelope, I think it would be reasonably attractive. The excess of window elements make it look cheap and old-fashioned.
 
Yes, I also agree that this building could have been better. The cladding at the bottom seems particularly offensive now that the curtainwall is going up. They should have used curtainwall or spandrel free cladding on the bottom half of the building.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top