Red October
Senior Member
What will the house part even be used for?
Toronto James Cooper Mansion | ?m | 32s | Tridel | Burka
- Thread starter AlvinofDiaspar
- Start date
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Amenities
Redroom Studios
Senior Member
I'm just trying to figure out if you detest spandrel panels the way they were used here or in general? Do you think that all glass towers should be 100% floor to ceiling window wall or curtain wall? No doubt spandrel is just about the cheapest way going to construct walls...
as for the podium, I think a lot of the "mess" has to do with the fact that there is still hoarding and construction materials around the site. Get rid of all that, put in some trees and landscaping and it will look a lot better. I just mention this because I know that on previous projects that I have complained about during the construction phase I actually came to like once construction was completed and the design fully executed.
as for creating a cohesive link between the mansion and tower... I disagree. The podium section is clearly transitional , picking up the brick material and some of the colour from the mansion. The light tan brick is repeated as a highlight in the horizontal bands that travel up the south side of the tower. As has been argued with the Distillery District, its the contrast of modern style and materials of the tower to the old style and brick of the mansion that makes the interaction so dynamic and interesting. Are you suggesting that the tower should have been clad in orange brick? That would have created a very dull and monotonous look here...
I dont know why I am arguing so much in defence of this project because it isnt the greatest thing ever... but its even farther from the worst. Its just that I can see the thinking that has gone into it and it makes sense to me.
Last edited:
Towered
Senior Member
I miss the Knights of Columbus sign.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
Redroom:
There's much in your post that condovo can respond to, but to the spandrels:
As you indicate, they are the cheapest way to throw up a tower as they're able to cover lots of 'face' for little money. Brick layers are typically paid on a per-brick or per-layer basis with beautiful results, but plenty of incurred cost as well. Precast panels have to be individually designed then formed according to the project/piece in question. As we know, they are then delivered to the site as completed portions, hoisted to the skies one by one (or sometimes in bunches if the individual pieces are small enough) and installed by the regular construction crew. This way, though the cost of custom-designing each panel is something to be accounted for, it pales in comparison to the cost of covering that same area with brick or stone. Furthermore, the panels can be installed by the regulars, eliminating the need for specialized workers such as bricklayers or stonemasons.
Spandrel panels are different beast entirely. They have become the 'filler' on projects with 'architects' and interior designers too lazy to modulate their floorplans so that such devices are rendered unnecessary. Because of the standardized process by which they are constructed, they are simply able to cover more for less. That said, the use of spandrels seems to vary by builder with companies like Tridel leading the way, oblivious to the sense of utter cheapness that the products bring to every project they are applied to. But it's not entirely the architects' fault. For example, if you look at the work of the recently-praised Rudy Wallman, you can discern a definite trend with each developer he partners with. Projects like Bisha (Lifetime) and Lumere (Menkes) make little use of spandrels and are that much better because of it. Likewise, 300 Front is a disaster in the making. Pull up a few renders or model pics and have a good, long, gander...trust me, it's not pretty. In short, these three projects are by the same firm but only two-thirds of them render a real sense of quality.
In the past, spandrels were an inventive way for architects to play with the designs of their buildings without serious costs and of this aA's Woodsworth Residence is excellent proof. Shocker once noted that looking west along Bloor from Avenue, though Danny's Crystal is what you immediately see, it is the Woodsworth tower which sneakily steals the show. I fought with that notion for awhile and while I don't completely agree with the statement, I do the sentiment. In recent years however, what was once an artistic device, used to break up the monotony of the modern block, has been abused to justify interior layouts which just don't work. It seems then that reconciling those layouts with the exterior form of the building seems no longer to matter. In ten years we will surely view the use excessive of these devises in the same way in which we look at aluminum siding from the 1970s and 80s: a cheap way to cover a lot of ground.
Fortunately there does seem to be hope, as some developers are moving away from the abysmal practice of excessive spandrelizing. Of this new trend the South Beach development in Etobicoke is an excellent example. Some have claimed that it seems to be the most 'aA-looking' project south of the Gardiner out there and, assuming that this is a compliment, it's not difficult to see why some have made it. What I can glean from those comments and the pictures accompanying them, is that forumers seem to like this project and more-closely associate it with something in the core because of the lack of cheap-looking spandrels hiding otherwise-resolvable faults. Furthermore, and to Redroom's earlier post, one of the best examples of how far we've strayed is right here on the north face of JCM. If you're able to look at that wall of cheap, plasticky alumo-glass and believe that that it's appropriate, much less attractive, please respond with your thoughts.
There's much in your post that condovo can respond to, but to the spandrels:
As you indicate, they are the cheapest way to throw up a tower as they're able to cover lots of 'face' for little money. Brick layers are typically paid on a per-brick or per-layer basis with beautiful results, but plenty of incurred cost as well. Precast panels have to be individually designed then formed according to the project/piece in question. As we know, they are then delivered to the site as completed portions, hoisted to the skies one by one (or sometimes in bunches if the individual pieces are small enough) and installed by the regular construction crew. This way, though the cost of custom-designing each panel is something to be accounted for, it pales in comparison to the cost of covering that same area with brick or stone. Furthermore, the panels can be installed by the regulars, eliminating the need for specialized workers such as bricklayers or stonemasons.
Spandrel panels are different beast entirely. They have become the 'filler' on projects with 'architects' and interior designers too lazy to modulate their floorplans so that such devices are rendered unnecessary. Because of the standardized process by which they are constructed, they are simply able to cover more for less. That said, the use of spandrels seems to vary by builder with companies like Tridel leading the way, oblivious to the sense of utter cheapness that the products bring to every project they are applied to. But it's not entirely the architects' fault. For example, if you look at the work of the recently-praised Rudy Wallman, you can discern a definite trend with each developer he partners with. Projects like Bisha (Lifetime) and Lumere (Menkes) make little use of spandrels and are that much better because of it. Likewise, 300 Front is a disaster in the making. Pull up a few renders or model pics and have a good, long, gander...trust me, it's not pretty. In short, these three projects are by the same firm but only two-thirds of them render a real sense of quality.
In the past, spandrels were an inventive way for architects to play with the designs of their buildings without serious costs and of this aA's Woodsworth Residence is excellent proof. Shocker once noted that looking west along Bloor from Avenue, though Danny's Crystal is what you immediately see, it is the Woodsworth tower which sneakily steals the show. I fought with that notion for awhile and while I don't completely agree with the statement, I do the sentiment. In recent years however, what was once an artistic device, used to break up the monotony of the modern block, has been abused to justify interior layouts which just don't work. It seems then that reconciling those layouts with the exterior form of the building seems no longer to matter. In ten years we will surely view the use excessive of these devises in the same way in which we look at aluminum siding from the 1970s and 80s: a cheap way to cover a lot of ground.
Fortunately there does seem to be hope, as some developers are moving away from the abysmal practice of excessive spandrelizing. Of this new trend the South Beach development in Etobicoke is an excellent example. Some have claimed that it seems to be the most 'aA-looking' project south of the Gardiner out there and, assuming that this is a compliment, it's not difficult to see why some have made it. What I can glean from those comments and the pictures accompanying them, is that forumers seem to like this project and more-closely associate it with something in the core because of the lack of cheap-looking spandrels hiding otherwise-resolvable faults. Furthermore, and to Redroom's earlier post, one of the best examples of how far we've strayed is right here on the north face of JCM. If you're able to look at that wall of cheap, plasticky alumo-glass and believe that that it's appropriate, much less attractive, please respond with your thoughts.
LowPolygon
Senior Member
^ great post Project End! extremely informative and thoughtful....
this level of detail is very valuable for non-architects like me...
this level of detail is very valuable for non-architects like me...
condovo
Senior Member
Excellent post, ProjectEnd.
I hate the way spandrel panels were used here.
When the dust settles and the trees grow, the podium will still be a mess. Go see for it yourself. Don't rely on pretty pictures. The real picture ain't so pretty.
The materials are cheap crap. I suppose Tridel's thinking goes something like this: 'We saved the bloody mansion. Now shut up while we cash out on a steaming pile of **. This is basically St. James Town anyway so who cares?!'
I hate the way spandrel panels were used here.
When the dust settles and the trees grow, the podium will still be a mess. Go see for it yourself. Don't rely on pretty pictures. The real picture ain't so pretty.
The materials are cheap crap. I suppose Tridel's thinking goes something like this: 'We saved the bloody mansion. Now shut up while we cash out on a steaming pile of **. This is basically St. James Town anyway so who cares?!'
Last edited:
LowPolygon
Senior Member
Well, Tridel's 'wholehearted belief' in good design is certainly on ample display in this latest 'masterwork'.
And because of the 'nature of the Tridel vision', that north facing wall is going to be a great 'source of artistic inspiration' for generations to come. it is truly the pièce de résistance of this visionary developer.
condovo
Senior Member
Architectural domestic terrorism.
Rowe
Active Member
Lets pray 300 Front Street will be of a high quality.
simply Dan
Active Member
The super cheap spandrel makes my eyes burn!
SP!RE
°°°°°°
I don't get it... I just see a bunch of pictures of unfinished construction and glass facades.
It's a dark colour so you don't notice each individual mullion as much... though because it's not finished construction, the outside is outstandingly dirty. Everyone seems to love Panorama, and remember when its podium (which is all dark coloured opaque panels and spandrels) was dirty from construction-- looked terrible. Since then, it's no issue.
My only complain with these unadorned spandrel spaces is that they are rather boring-- but far from offensive, especially to the odd Joe walking past it. The mansion will stand out as it should. And the opaque glass is better (for this design) than unadorned walls of concrete or precast, surely?
Yes, it's low on detail, but it's the bridge between Tridel's older, crappier designs, and newer, better stuff. The overall shape of the tower is very pleasing, and even that was a step forwarsd. One way I will agree with you guys, however, is the podium. The brick they used and the overall design of those cheap townhouses... absolutely abysmal.
But don't blame all your problems on spandrel glass. It's most affordable, and it's used on all sorts of buildings that each of you praise regularly, and maybe even live in. Spandrels are a part of life.
It's a dark colour so you don't notice each individual mullion as much... though because it's not finished construction, the outside is outstandingly dirty. Everyone seems to love Panorama, and remember when its podium (which is all dark coloured opaque panels and spandrels) was dirty from construction-- looked terrible. Since then, it's no issue.
My only complain with these unadorned spandrel spaces is that they are rather boring-- but far from offensive, especially to the odd Joe walking past it. The mansion will stand out as it should. And the opaque glass is better (for this design) than unadorned walls of concrete or precast, surely?
Yes, it's low on detail, but it's the bridge between Tridel's older, crappier designs, and newer, better stuff. The overall shape of the tower is very pleasing, and even that was a step forwarsd. One way I will agree with you guys, however, is the podium. The brick they used and the overall design of those cheap townhouses... absolutely abysmal.
But don't blame all your problems on spandrel glass. It's most affordable, and it's used on all sorts of buildings that each of you praise regularly, and maybe even live in. Spandrels are a part of life.
Last edited:
HHC
Active Member
This building's receiving just too much backlash people!! It's Toronto guys, appreciate the fact that it's not green or blue and move onto the next one. The colour of the building forms a great contrast with the vibrancy of the mansion, despite the embarrassing spandrels.
Red October
Senior Member
^
^ I agree.. I'm just glad for the departure from the same blue/green glass used on every other condo building in Toronto..
And even if it is bland looking, that will just draw more attention to the pretty little house attached to it.
^ I agree.. I'm just glad for the departure from the same blue/green glass used on every other condo building in Toronto..
And even if it is bland looking, that will just draw more attention to the pretty little house attached to it.
Jasonzed
Senior Member
from Sunday
