Toronto Living Shangri-La Toronto | 214.57m | 66s | Westbank | James Cheng

grey said:
yeah, I guess you're right.

Oh wait, you live here and you "love the look and architecture of the building":

universityplaza1ru6wl5.jpg
Click to expand...

lol

What exactly is your point grey? He thinks his building is attractive and shangri-la is not. You think the opposite.

And yet you quote him as if he is incorrect somehow.

In case you haven't realized yet, your opinion is not worth any more than his, and vice versa.

(In fact with all the complaining you do, in some people's eyes your opinion may be worth even less...)
 
Agreeing with Gei here. This ongoing pattern of 'old' UT cronies group-bashing a newbie for his/her opinion is a little pathetic for a forum that 'usually' holds higher standards. Glass is not his/her thing, to the degree it is being used in the current wave of building. Big deal, not a crime.

Cultured stone anyone?...
 
Thank you Gei & Tewder for your kind words, as the welcome I have had here has been overwhelming.

I joined this place as it is a public forum on the city I live in to discuss things that affect my surroundings as it appears to be one of the better ones when it comes to these issues. And there's a lot of information I have found out about projects in this city, that I wouldn't have known otherwise. Such as the condo proposal being built next to mine. And I posed my first question which was to ask about why my building was so disliked as it genuinely took me by surprise. When I received responses, most of them didn't elaborate past anything other than adjectives or verbs about it based on their personal preference. Certainly not anymore than my post about the glass buildings in this city. And yet somehow I am lesser in my point or no point at all. Thank you. Next time just ignore my post if you feels it undermines your intelligence.

Regarding the Shangri-La, it's not that I hate glass buildings as I think there are some phenomenally beautiful designs throughout the world made from glass. I am merely speaking of what seems to be the never ending use of glass in new constructions in Toronto and the ever increasing supply of them on the Lakefront and lower Spadina area. If people love them, then that's great! It's just a personal preference. The design of the Shangri-La itself it aesthetically very nice. It just would be nice to see a proposal for something else for a change but it seems to be stuck on that right now.

My taste isn't soley kept on one type of material whether it's buildings made from brick, stone, wood, concrete or metal. I like Gothic and Renaissance architecture as much as I like Modern and Post Modern. It just varies from building to building and area to area. I love the look and feel of a log home when I am away at the cottage but I still wouldn't build one in the middle of downtown.
 
Greengrey, it is sometimes difficult to have a alternative viewpoint around here but I hope that doesn't stop you from continuing to participate on the forum. I agree with you that the city has a lot of glass projects and now that many are starting to come online the remaining bulk in the development pipeline are going to arrive when the novelty wears off. The perfect example of this is the Milan Residences in sales at Yonge/Church. It is nice enough but, imo, it not distinct enough given the other glass condos that predate it (for better or worse).

Shangri-La, however, has got me really excited. I personally think its elegance, stature, and design are beautiful. I have every faith that the materials will be of a high quality and the city will be significantly enhanced by this glass tower. Variety of proposals is key but I can't lump Shangri-La into the generic glass box category.
 
gei said:
lol

What exactly is your point grey? He thinks his building is attractive and shangri-la is not. You think the opposite.

And yet you quote him as if he is incorrect somehow.

In case you haven't realized yet, your opinion is not worth any more than his, and vice versa.

(In fact with all the complaining you do, in some people's eyes your opinion may be worth even less...)
Click to expand...

Opinions on the Internet?!! Raghhhh!!

Relax, you take yourself too seriously.
 
Hang in there GreenGrey, and by the way..Welcome!
The Newbies tend to get a bit of a hazing with their first couple of posts.(I know I did)
I guess we have to decide if you are as nuts as the rest of us and you are worth being accepted.
Grey's advise to you is good. ( Sheesh! I can't believe I just said that)
Have fun!
 
greengrey said:
Thank you Gei & Tewder for your kind words, as the welcome I have had here has been overwhelming.

I joined this place as it is a public forum on the city I live in to discuss things that affect my surroundings as it appears to be one of the better ones when it comes to these issues. And there's a lot of information I have found out about projects in this city, that I wouldn't have known otherwise. Such as the condo proposal being built next to mine. And I posed my first question which was to ask about why my building was so disliked as it genuinely took me by surprise. When I received responses, most of them didn't elaborate past anything other than adjectives or verbs about it based on their personal preference. Certainly not anymore than my post about the glass buildings in this city. And yet somehow I am lesser in my point or no point at all. Thank you. Next time just ignore my post if you feels it undermines your intelligence.

Regarding the Shangri-La, it's not that I hate glass buildings as I think there are some phenomenally beautiful designs throughout the world made from glass. I am merely speaking of what seems to be the never ending use of glass in new constructions in Toronto and the ever increasing supply of them on the Lakefront and lower Spadina area. If people love them, then that's great! It's just a personal preference. The design of the Shangri-La itself it aesthetically very nice. It just would be nice to see a proposal for something else for a change but it seems to be stuck on that right now.

My taste isn't soley kept on one type of material whether it's buildings made from brick, stone, wood, concrete or metal. I like Gothic and Renaissance architecture as much as I like Modern and Post Modern. It just varies from building to building and area to area. I love the look and feel of a log home when I am away at the cottage but I still wouldn't build one in the middle of downtown.
Click to expand...


I agree that your opinion is just as valid as anyone elses, however, you still fail to mention which buildings interest you since glass doesn't seem to be your thing.
 
Welcome to the forum greengrey - your opinions are welcomed and please don't take the criticisms of University Plaza personally - the intent here is to talk about the building, not the individuals living in it. That said, there are plenty to critique about UP - particularly the aesthetics and design qualities (built form, choice of materials, street level integration, etc) - none of which stands out in a good way, at best. There are far better examples of projects using brick that are executed much better in all the previously mentioned aspects.

You will find that there are plenty of discussion on here about the "green class condo" phenomenon, and that the general consensus is that most are ho-hum; Shangri-La, however, is likely to be produce a high quality end product. If there are criticisms, they are probably better left for the generic...

AoD
 
greengrey said:
Regarding the Shangri-La, it's not that I hate glass buildings as I think there are some phenomenally beautiful designs throughout the world made from glass. I am merely speaking of what seems to be the never ending use of glass in new constructions in Toronto and the ever increasing supply of them on the Lakefront and lower Spadina area. If people love them, then that's great! It's just a personal preference. The design of the Shangri-La itself it aesthetically very nice. It just would be nice to see a proposal for something else for a change but it seems to be stuck on that right now.

My taste isn't soley kept on one type of material whether it's buildings made from brick, stone, wood, concrete or metal. I like Gothic and Renaissance architecture as much as I like Modern and Post Modern. It just varies from building to building and area to area. I love the look and feel of a log home when I am away at the cottage but I still wouldn't build one in the middle of downtown.
Click to expand...
The issue of monotonous glass cladding comes up often. I think most will agree it's just a phase the architecture community is going through, like concrete brutalism a few decades ago. Personally, I'd love to see a return to beautiful masonry, as long as it's professional and tasteful (fat chance).

I don't think anyone's actually 100% for or against glass or brick. You'll find that University Plaza is almost universally hated for its cheesy PoMo details that resemble a tacky gentlemens' club (it's a great example of bad postmodern, and an example of good postmodern would be Scotia Plaza). That isn't to say the units within the building aren't gorgeous with well-planned layouts. On the other hand, I think Shangri-La is generally admired far more for is massing than its cladding or design.

There's a good handful of brick going up around the city that you might like. My favourites are the smaller infill developments. I think there are a few Brad J Lamb condos going up with trendy black brick around Sherbourne somewhere. London on the Esplanade also has some nice red brickwork being done (and not just flat walls) as mandated by the community and the City. Developments liek these add some nice modernist variety while remaining within the context of their neighbourhoods.
 
grey said:
On the other hand, I think Shangri-La is generally admired far more for is massing than its cladding or design.

There's a good handful of brick going up around the city that you might like. My favourites are the smaller infill developments. I think there are a few Brad J Lamb condos going up with trendy black brick around Sherbourne somewhere. London on the Esplanade also has some nice red brickwork being done (and not just flat walls) as mandated by the community and the City. Developments liek these add some nice modernist variety while remaining within the context of their neighbourhoods.
Click to expand...

I agree, Shangri-La stands out from the pack of "green-glass boxes".

The trendy black-brick at Sherbourne and Richmond is Modern. I think it will become my favourite structure of the year (the year it is finally built). London is definately shaping into a surprise after being a hole for so long.
 
I agree that individually these glass buildings are beautiful, some more so than others. The issue to me, however, is context. When you put up a number of glass buildings together they tend to cancel each other out, no matter how stunning the individual architecture, and you end up with glass reflecting glass which is not very exciting an effect. On the other hand a strategically placed glass building, which is to say one that takes into account its context, will work well. BA works for me because it is surrounded by buildings of other materials that are reflected in BA, that play against BA. With City Place, RBC, Ritz, and other existing glass buildings in the immediate area being so close together I am wondering if the effect of the use of glass gets lost a little, and that even the roof of Roy Thompson hall may suffer a little for it in the end. Still, it is early and the jury's out, and I hope I will get a nice surprise.
 
Tewder said:
I agree that individually these glass buildings are beautiful, some more so than others. The issue to me, however, is context. When you put up a number of glass buildings together they tend to cancel each other out, no matter how stunning the individual architecture, and you end up with glass reflecting glass which is not very exciting an effect. On the other hand a strategically placed glass building, which is to say one that takes into account its context, will work well. BA works for me because it is surrounded by buildings of other materials that are reflected in BA, that play against BA. With City Place, RBC, Ritz, and other existing glass buildings in the immediate area being so close together I am wondering if the effect of the use of glass gets lost a little, and that even the roof of Roy Thompson hall may suffer a little for it in the end. Still, it is early and the jury's out, and I hope I will get a nice surprise.
Click to expand...

I couldn't agree more.
 
greengrey said:
I posed my first question which was to ask about why my building was so disliked as it genuinely took me by surprise. When I received responses, most of them didn't elaborate past anything other than adjectives or verbs about it based on their personal preference.
Click to expand...

I don't disagree with your concerns, but at the same time there is nothing wrong with someone simply saying "it's ugly" or "I hate it" and nothing more. Aesthetics are personal. By justifying why "it's ugly" with some sort of explanation, convoluted or otherwise, doesn't make the post any more valid. It may make for more interesting reading but that's all.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top