Toronto Social at Church + Dundas | 164.89m | 52s | Pemberton | RAW Design

thumbnail_IMG_0277.jpg


thumbnail_IMG_0276.jpg
 
DSC said:
Unfortunately, it is likely to simply create an area where dirt, garbage and pigeons can collect. I have little hope that the ongoing maintenance of this building will be better than its 'architecture'.
Click to expand...
I bet Pemberton execs are kicking themselves for having paid an ‘architect’ to design this mess. They could’ve instructed AI to design a residential tower with maximum number of units allowable for the site using the cheapest materials instead (although AI probably wasn’t that advanced then). And the result would probably have been less of an eyesore too …
 
It doesn't look /as bad/ coming up north from Dalhousie. Rather an okay filler for the density along the street.
 
Rascacielo said:
I bet Pemberton execs are kicking themselves for having paid an ‘architect’ to design this mess. They could’ve instructed AI to design a residential tower with maximum number of units allowable for the site using the cheapest materials instead (although AI probably wasn’t that advanced then). And the result would probably have been less of an eyesore too …
Click to expand...
I don't know if they are. As others have mentioned, it's the developers cheaping out that creates bad architecture. Pemberton knew what they were doing in all likelihood.
 
Rascacielo said:
I bet Pemberton execs are kicking themselves for having paid an ‘architect’ to design this mess. They could’ve instructed AI to design a residential tower with maximum number of units allowable for the site using the cheapest materials instead (although AI probably wasn’t that advanced then). And the result would probably have been less of an eyesore too …
Click to expand...
I just did. Ta-da!:
Screenshot 2024-01-06 at 10.53.19.jpeg.png
 
Distilled said:
I just did. Ta-da!:
Click to expand...
...that would of probably look better than what we ended up here. /sigh

But here's the issue that I have eluded to before that really bothers me the most: That is, they created an undulating dynamic balcony narrative that looks fairly striking at certain angles. But because they used such cheap arsed trashy material of a Herb Tarlek caliber, that at most other angles it completely distracts from the said balconies. How do you design then approve of something like that? What was the point of this in the first place? If I were to cut corners here, I would have killed the balconies...as that would of made much more bottom lined sense. Not that I would encourage such behavior...but, jeez!
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
UtakataNoAnnex said:
...that would of probably look better than what we ended up here. /sigh

But here's the issue that I have eluded to before that really bothers me the most: That is, they created an undulating dynamic balcony narrative that looks fairly striking at certain angles. But because they used such cheap arsed trashy material of a Herb Tarlek caliber, that at most other angles it completely distracts from the said balconies. How do you design then approve of something like that? What was the point of this in the first place? If I were to cut corners here, I would of killed the balconies...as that would have made much more bottom lined sense. Not that I would encourage such behavior...but, jeez!
Click to expand...
At least Herb wore colourful suits. This drab spandrel is the go to cladding choice for far too many condominium developers in this city. It’s so disappointing to witness one of the greatest building booms in this city’s history be populated by so much bland cheapness. While it happens in other major cities, I really don’t believe it happens to such a degree. Is Toronto just home to more developers who are mostly all bottom line driven, or are there design rules in other jurisdictions that help prevent what we see so often here?
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
...that would of probably look better than what we ended up here. /sigh

But here's the issue that I have eluded to before that really bothers me the most: That is, they created an undulating dynamic balcony narrative that looks fairly striking at certain angles. But because they used such cheap arsed trashy material of a Herb Tarlek caliber, that at most other angles it completely distracts from the said balconies. How do you design then approve of something like that? What was the point of this in the first place? If I were to cut corners here, I would have killed the balconies...as that would of made much more bottom lined sense. Not that I would encourage such behavior...but, jeez!
Click to expand...
Exactly! Instead of lipstick on a pig is like acid on a peacock.
 
This is One of the Worst and ugliest buildings I've seen, This would never fly in Alberta or BC
The building would've looked okay if the spandral was not Bathroom tile green
Yes this building reminds me of a bathroom

If this was slightly different materials this could have looked decent

but now we can make fun of Pemberton
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top