Toronto Massey Tower Condos | 206.95m | 60s | MOD Developments | Hariri Pontarini

Tuscani01 said:
I found the Met had the most akward lobby I have ever been in.
Click to expand...

It's a very small site that they had to work with. It's far from perfect but I think it's much better than having expansive, wasted space that could be for the public, especially in the case of a historical building.

As for being a small lobby, it allowed the concierge great visibility IMO and allowed residents quick access to elevators instead of having to walk really far with all their bags etc. As for "cold and uninviting", it prevented loitering. I never saw people loitering in that lobby when I lived there. But it is indeed very much form-follows-function... It's small and far from flashy, and that's what I like about it. It gets the job done.

Whenever I lived there, elevator backups were always due to the fact that there was always one out of service. The back-ups into the lobby were more of an elevator issue than a lobby design issue, in my opinion.
 
Last edited:
"As for "cold and uninviting", it prevented loitering"

this is often the case. being cold and uninviting is actually a great 'one size fits all' approach for all sorts of things! getting rid of roommates, couch surfers, nerdy friends from high school who try to connect with you on Facebook etc.
 
I was only speaking to the perceived (I find to be minimal) security issue. The concierge in the MET can see the entire lobby from once glance; there are no pillars, couches, hiding areas of any sort. That's not my problem with large lobbies but Tuscani01 felt there was a security issue whereas I felt that the supposed cold and sterile lobby simply didn't provide enough space for there to be any security issues.
 
SP!RE said:
I was only speaking to the perceived (I find to be minimal) security issue. The concierge in the MET can see the entire lobby from once glance; there are no pillars, couches, hiding areas of any sort. That's not my problem with large lobbies but Tuscani01 felt there was a security issue whereas I felt that the supposed cold and sterile lobby simply didn't provide enough space for there to be any security issues.
Click to expand...

They could never see anyone unless the person was right in front of them. The desk was also quite high, so unless they were standing, it was quite difficult for them to see anyone. People had no issue just walking in, especially visitors. Every other building I have lived in has been way more secure.
 
Haha! Another pic, courtesy: I dont even know

s22mi.jpg



Some more pics at:

http://ow.ly/i/GYIV
http://ow.ly/i/GYA9
http://ow.ly/i/GYtN
http://ow.ly/i/GYsm
http://ow.ly/i/GYtN


Even More!!!!!!!!!!!

https://picasaweb.google.com/104312...sseyTower?feat=flashalbum#5753363291818296290
 
Last edited:
SP!RE said:
It also disturbs me that not only is downtown becoming a place only for the upper-middle class and rich, but in projects like this, the old architecture is often handed over to a large, over-sized and under-utilized lobby for residents. In the image above, it's represented quite well.
Click to expand...

If a particular location is desirable, people will pay a premium for living in it. I think it is fair. We should feel blessed that middle and up-middle class are willing to live in the core, shouldn't we? Poorer people can still have downtown, they just can't own any property. There are still any affordable apartment buildings downtown, and it is still possible for those who make less than 50K a year to live in the downtown core.
I think in general, downtown Toronto works pretty well. It is nowhere near prohibitively expensive to average people to live, like central Paris or Manhattan are.
 
figaro said:
We should feel blessed that middle and up-middle class are willing to live in the core, shouldn't we? Poorer people can still have downtown, they just can't own any property...
Click to expand...

I'm going to pretend you didn't actually just say that. Both because I'm appalled at that opinion and that I dont want to derail this thread any further.

Just beware of 1) justifying the status quo by comparing us to prohibitively expensive cities like Paris (that have huge inequality issues... followed the news the last few years?) and 2) pretending that it's not getting any worse.
 
SP!RE said:
I'm going to pretend you didn't actually just say that. Both because I'm appalled at that opinion and that I dont want to derail this thread any further.

Just beware of 1) justifying the status quo by comparing us to prohibitively expensive cities like Paris (that have huge inequality issues... followed the news the last few years?) and 2) pretending that it's not getting any worse.
Click to expand...

What exactly are you "appalled" at - reality?
 
Given that Massey Tower and One Bloor are by the same architect, it shouldn't be a surprise that they're similar. This isn't a case of one design trying to rip off another (like 460 Yonge and One Bloor).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top