Toronto CHAZ | 150.87m | 47s | 45 Charles Ltd | P + S / IBI

I gotta say it would be CRIMINAL if the developer didn't hire aA to complete the job. The thing that annoys me the most about the past decade's building boom is how each project, even if side by side, rarely speak to each other properly. Imagine if Victorian Toronto builders had mixed igloos with red brick homes--not very attractive.:) (The more I look at City Place West from around King and Spadina, the more I'm loving the continuous "Dutch grey" crisp lines of the area.) aA needs to help complete the streetwall height and atmosphere begun by Casa!
 
I would be sad to see this go, I think it's beautiful. It better be replaced with something that is deserving!
 
Automation Gallery said:
OK... lets not call it an eyesore, but just an outdated office building.
Click to expand...

So was this

POSTCARD+-+TORONTO+-+I.O.F.+TEMPLE+BUILDING+-+NICE+-+1906.jpg
 
Automation Gallery said:
Looking at this 70s building carefull with that thingy on the roof , id say no love loss if it goes.
Click to expand...

First of all, it's not 1970s. Think of the date as being more 1966ish.

Secondly, you need a copy of this book.
http://www.chbooks.com/catalogue/concrete_toronto

Lesson being: if you're to write off a building like this with "no love loss if it goes", it's best when you don't sound like an ignorant amateur who doesn't have his dates or details straight.
 
I like this building and it would be a shame to see the loss of office space here. What makes Charles Street work so well is its mix of residential and offices (U of T, McKinsey, the retail around Manulife, YMCA building, this building, Canada Post, etc).

Would the zoning for this need to be changed? (sorry, didn't check earlier in the thread)

Building materials aside, I can't think of any other buildings that have its shape. It is unique.
 
adma said:
First of all, it's not 1970s. Think of the date as being more 1966ish.

Secondly, you need a copy of this book.
http://www.chbooks.com/catalogue/concrete_toronto

Lesson being: if you're to write off a building like this with "no love loss if it goes", it's best when you don't sound like an ignorant amateur who doesn't have his dates or details straight.
Click to expand...

Ok...im 4 years off on a 44 year old building, as always you have done your research on this building. Cheers to you if it is saved.
 
adma said:
So was this

POSTCARD+-+TORONTO+-+I.O.F.+TEMPLE+BUILDING+-+NICE+-+1906.jpg
Click to expand...

That has better looks and features that is lost today on most buildings.

I all slap, slap and onto the next one for that next buck.
 
I wish the Temple Building wasn't demolished but man, what a hideous building. Must of been some heavy drinkers in the Victorian era for the designer's status to rise over this.
 
we need the greatest variety of buildings possible to make an interesting streetscape. Its a shame to think of all the heritage stuff that Toronto could still have if they werent levelled for something new. Lets build on derelict lots and parking lots before even considering demolishing our history.
 
maestro said:
I wish the Temple Building wasn't demolished but man, what a hideous building. Must of been some heavy drinkers in the Victorian era for the designer's status to rise over this.
Click to expand...

It was an age of heft, and brash, butch, commercial buildings like this. While there are good architects in every age, not every age is a golden one.
 
A couple of recent photos of 45 Charles E. It'll be a shame to lose this and it'll suck for the people on the east side of Casa, these buildings look like they'll be fairly close to each other.

Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.

 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top