carturo15
Active Member
Does anyone know if this building has been already registered?
Solaris
Senior Member
now that GLAS is completed ... should this thread be moved to Buildings, Architecture & Urban Design section?
Ramako
Moderator
A lot of threads should be.
Modurbia
New Member
The building has not yet registered. Was about to when the City went on strike.
casaguy
Senior Member
Condo Critic: Offices, condos complete transformation
Though it's a bulky building, the Glas condominium seems smaller than it is and makes sense in taking advantage of existing infrastructure.
Jul 18, 2009 04:30 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
The transformation of King and Spadina is all but complete. Though it remains very much a work in progress, its days as a sweaty industrial precinct are long gone.
Indeed, the warehouses and factories where workers once toiled have now been converted to smart offices and cosmopolitan condos.
At the same time, numerous new residential buildings have appeared in the neighbourhood.
Some are better than others, of course, but generally speaking the architectural quality has been unusually high.
These streets, each more urban than the next, seem to bring out the best in Toronto architects. But it must be said, this isn't a context that promotes the kind of sexy solo architecture that grabs headlines.
Instead, it is a location that calls out for the sort of fabric buildings that form the city. We may not always pay close attention to them, but they add up to the sum of the city.
Condo Critic
GLAS, 25 OXLEY ST.: Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this rather large condo complex is that it seems so much smaller than it really is.
Filling the best part of a city block, it faces onto Oxley St. as well as Charlotte St., a short road running north from King St. Though taller and bulkier than the surrounding buildings, Glas reads almost as a series of discrete structures, some transparent, others clad in dark masonry, which appears to have become decidedly trendy in Toronto in the last several years.
Though one might complain about the bulk of this complex, it happens to make sense. After all, the need to intensify our use of the city, to take maximum advantage of its extensive existing infrastructure has never been greater.
The sheer size of the project is most visible on the north side, which faces Oxley, a tiny alley of a street extending east from Spadina. Here, the building consists of a two-storey glass and stainless steel base; it contains a row of street-level townhouses as well as the less-than-obvious main entrance, yet another shiny metallic element.
A glass facade stretches above several more floors until it gives way a to a series of setbacks. Built right out to the sidewalk, the Oxley frontage couldn't be more urban; in winter inhabitants will be blown in with the wind.
On Charlotte, the building has a bit more room to breath. A series of striking circular steel planters brings visual interest to the sidewalk. A box-like architectural feature, made of black brick, give the condo some heft and helps anchor it in its site.
The south side, accessible by an unnamed laneway, is the most obviously residential, mainly because of the balconies that punctuate the facade.
On the Oxley (north) side, the building could be commercial, even corporate, especially at grade. But because it is also the location of the service entrance and an unexpected row of garages, the south facade is the most problematic.
The lane is shared with another condo and has been treated as a strictly utilitarian space; on the other hand, it's the most desirable from a dweller's point of view. The contrast between the sky above and the mud below has rarely been harder to ignore.
Grade: B+
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Email condocritic@thestar.ca
Though it's a bulky building, the Glas condominium seems smaller than it is and makes sense in taking advantage of existing infrastructure.
Jul 18, 2009 04:30 AM
CHRISTOPHER HUME
The transformation of King and Spadina is all but complete. Though it remains very much a work in progress, its days as a sweaty industrial precinct are long gone.
Indeed, the warehouses and factories where workers once toiled have now been converted to smart offices and cosmopolitan condos.
At the same time, numerous new residential buildings have appeared in the neighbourhood.
Some are better than others, of course, but generally speaking the architectural quality has been unusually high.
These streets, each more urban than the next, seem to bring out the best in Toronto architects. But it must be said, this isn't a context that promotes the kind of sexy solo architecture that grabs headlines.
Instead, it is a location that calls out for the sort of fabric buildings that form the city. We may not always pay close attention to them, but they add up to the sum of the city.
Condo Critic
GLAS, 25 OXLEY ST.: Perhaps the most remarkable aspect of this rather large condo complex is that it seems so much smaller than it really is.
Filling the best part of a city block, it faces onto Oxley St. as well as Charlotte St., a short road running north from King St. Though taller and bulkier than the surrounding buildings, Glas reads almost as a series of discrete structures, some transparent, others clad in dark masonry, which appears to have become decidedly trendy in Toronto in the last several years.
Though one might complain about the bulk of this complex, it happens to make sense. After all, the need to intensify our use of the city, to take maximum advantage of its extensive existing infrastructure has never been greater.
The sheer size of the project is most visible on the north side, which faces Oxley, a tiny alley of a street extending east from Spadina. Here, the building consists of a two-storey glass and stainless steel base; it contains a row of street-level townhouses as well as the less-than-obvious main entrance, yet another shiny metallic element.
A glass facade stretches above several more floors until it gives way a to a series of setbacks. Built right out to the sidewalk, the Oxley frontage couldn't be more urban; in winter inhabitants will be blown in with the wind.
On Charlotte, the building has a bit more room to breath. A series of striking circular steel planters brings visual interest to the sidewalk. A box-like architectural feature, made of black brick, give the condo some heft and helps anchor it in its site.
The south side, accessible by an unnamed laneway, is the most obviously residential, mainly because of the balconies that punctuate the facade.
On the Oxley (north) side, the building could be commercial, even corporate, especially at grade. But because it is also the location of the service entrance and an unexpected row of garages, the south facade is the most problematic.
The lane is shared with another condo and has been treated as a strictly utilitarian space; on the other hand, it's the most desirable from a dweller's point of view. The contrast between the sky above and the mud below has rarely been harder to ignore.
Grade: B+
WHAT DO YOU THINK? Email condocritic@thestar.ca
condovo
Senior Member
Glas deserves an 'A'. Hudson deserves a B+. Hume ought to swap these grades.
lister
Active Member
Other than the black bricks, I still think Glas is ugly. I hate all glass condos.
Archivist
Senior Member
Personally, I don't think Hudson and glas are comparable. Glas is a good and handsome building that completely fills its site. But the weak demands of the site make it a rather un-complex building - it almost doesn't matter where the entrance is, whether there is retail, or what the public experience of walking past the building is, since it's for all intents and purposes buried on alleys. That being said, I appreciate it's urbanity.
Hudson has an incomparably more difficult job, sitting an a well travelled intersection with frontage on two busy streets, accommodating retail, as well as entrances for people and cars, and having a much higher visibility in the city. It's materials are also completely different from glas. I'm not sure much is really to be gained from the comparison. For the matter, I find hudson admirable in how it manages these functions.
Hudson has an incomparably more difficult job, sitting an a well travelled intersection with frontage on two busy streets, accommodating retail, as well as entrances for people and cars, and having a much higher visibility in the city. It's materials are also completely different from glas. I'm not sure much is really to be gained from the comparison. For the matter, I find hudson admirable in how it manages these functions.
Solaris
Senior Member
to me .... Hudson is fine dining and Glas is fast food ... there is no comparison between these two buildings
condovo
Senior Member
To me Hudson is ugly and joyless and Glas is light, airy, and beautiful...there is no comparison between these two buildings.
simuls
Senior Member
I agree with condovo, the Hudson leaves no joy in my eye and could be smack dab in the middle of Pickering, but glas is beautifully urban.
dogbiskit
New Member
LOVE GLAS. now if only they would hurry up and register already. i'm hoping some 1 bed units that don't cost half a million go up for sale!
adma
Superstar
Hmm, sounds like the anti-4SC/Corus/Jack Diamond crowd is using using "could be anywhere" logic indiscriminately. (And I don't see how Glas is, in the end, any less Pickeringesque--in either case, one would argue it to be a signal of Pickering's "urbanizing" pretensions, should they exist.)
simuls
Senior Member
It's not indiscriminate if the shoe fits...
...and I'm not anti-4SC/Corus/Jack Diamond at all. I like some of his work very much, including the 4SC, and Corus is an excellent company that I have worked for several times and thoroughly enjoy. The quibble is with the sub par building on vastly over-par land - just made that one up, not sure if the metaphor works, but i kinda like the flow
JayBee
Senior Member
I like both buildings. To say Hudson is "ugly" is a bit of a stretch IMO. The interiors are top notch as well.