Toronto L-Tower | 204.82m | 58s | Cityzen | Daniel Libeskind

slicecom said:
This once beautiful design has been butchered. First they chopped off the boot, then the ugly ventilation at the top, then the even uglier pipes added to the top, now it's going to have a single protruding balcony sticking off the back!?
Click to expand...

Don't forget the low-quality window wall on the east, west and south façades. It actually reminds me of a bit of Trump. The more of it they build, the worse the tower gets. (Though, unlike Trump, still a very good tower on the whole)
 
Last edited:
Ruined, schmuined. It's still a striking building any way you look at it. The pipes will be largely invisible, the vents are almost insignificant and the protruding balcony is merely a wee wart on an otherwise very sleek building.

People will get over it - we all will.
 
Last edited:
modern™ said:
And have you looked at it? Because the balcony is inset, not in any way protruding.
Click to expand...

On closer inspection of the photo I posted above, you're completely right. For a minute I thought that the protruding section was forms supporting a concrete slab, but the floorplate of that floor is clearly under the platform, so it looks like it's nothing more than temporary work space. That's a big relief.
 
Last edited:
Could you link me a review or two? I quickly tried searching and didn't come up with much and would like to view them.
 
All those recent "review" posts were based on a misreading of the last L Tower photo to be posted. Meanwhile, Aura the sleek black elliptical (ellipticalish) tower still rises out of Aura the clunky million mullion mess box.

42
 
Many people misread the balcony, but even as an inverted balcony, it's still there, and it's very poorly integrated into the design. I didn't mind the vents or some of the other disappointments people have had with this design, but the balcony on the south elevation looks out of place and cheapens the whole thing for me.
 
modern™ said:
Many people misread the balcony, but even as an inverted balcony, it's still there, and it's very poorly integrated into the design. I didn't mind the vents or some of the other disappointments people have had with this design, but the balcony on the south elevation looks out of place and cheapens the whole thing for me.
Click to expand...

I'm glad to hear it's not actually protruding, since its recessed, it doesn't really bother me much more than the ugly venting on the rear. The chimneys and the boot are the worst compromises to the exterior design in my opinion.
 
Ramako said:
14576139445_4ce15b920c_b.jpg

By: drum118 on Flickr
Click to expand...

Once glazed, I assume in the same treatment as the rest of the balconies, it's going to provide a stripe below that undifferentiated louver section, providing some termination to the staggered, short balconies below. It may actually improve the look, not detract from it. Hard to be so certain about it until we actually see it.

42
 
I don't understand why there was no attempt to cover those pipes on the roof. I'm sure any decent artist could have turned it into an interesting decorative feature. To just leave it as pipes, is like Trump Tower just leaving that industrial-looking crows nest around the light. How you can build brand new, sleek towers and then leave raw, unpainted junk showing, just blows my mind. I just don't notice that happening on large, high profile buildings in other large cities. It shouldn't be happening here. It's stupid, unresolved details like this, that ruin a building for me. Small details are important and they can make or break a building.
 
Last edited:
Few buildings have to deal with knife-edge crowns. The pipes are always up there, they're just hidden more easily on a typical roof. In this case, once the blue band along the top edge is complete, the pipes here will not be as noticeable as they are in this incomplete state.

42
 
interchange42 said:
Once glazed, I assume in the same treatment as the rest of the balconies, it's going to provide a stripe below that undifferentiated louver section, providing some termination to the staggered, short balconies below. It may actually improve the look, not detract from it. Hard to be so certain about it until we actually see it.

42
Click to expand...

I have seen it, multiple times. The image you quoted/referred to is not how it looks now. The balcony glazing is up and the forms are removed. And it does not improve the look. It looks like the afterthought to the design that it is. It's not tied into the random balcony arrangement, it's not centred or positioned in any particular way (aside from the layout of the interior of the unit, no doubt), and the balcony glazing doesn't attempt to blend in to the window-wall used (think X condos, etc.).

This wasn't depicted in elevations, nor was it part of the design until a purchaser had them create a custom unit here. It's a challenge to work an afterthought into a design (I would imagine they may not even be satisfied they had to incorporate that into the design), especially when it's a different type of space/unit in a project of otherwise uniform residential units that provide a consistent appearance for the facade. While it's very optimistic/ glass-half-full of you to suggest it could improve the design, I think once you see it, you'll feel disappointed.
 
Last edited:
I was speaking about the architects, who I would imagine either enjoyed the challenge or were frustrated to have to incorporate that unit into the design. Based on how it turned out, I don't think it was particularly enjoyable for them.

The developers, do doubt, would have been happy to have sold that space.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top