Toronto TeaHouse 501 Yonge Condominiums | 170.98m | 52s | Lanterra | a—A

This site is similar sized to the Murano complex, but it's now 2011 not 2005, so why not more height here?

Those opposed to this project are nuts! They remind me of that crazy old woman who said tall buildings give her headaches and unable to breathe as she enters the city from Etobicoke at the Pug Awards Monday night! lolz!
 
Traynor said:
That is the point... This site really IS NOT large enough for two towers...Especially with the massing they proposed. Lanterra knows this and they know the City knows this. It's all a game to get more height.
Click to expand...


I think this is right - they had to demonstrate to the city that two towers is the wrong approach so they can get the city to the table to discuss something more appropriate. The ugly, simplistic design of the two tower proposal backs this up. The fact that Lanterra owns the land and has the right to build something like the proposal - even if they are taken to the OMB - is the ammunition they need to strong-arm the city. This could be very interesting.
 
@ greenleaf. Great clip from the Greatest TV Show of all Time. Everyone should watch "The Wire" just to understand how bad policy and corruption can turn a once proud city into an urban hell-hole. (Yes, it could happen here.)
 
Big Daddy said:
This is pathetic; Lanterra has no marketing savvy at all. If they get this project thrown out altogether, they have no one to blame but themselves. Great idea "let's propose something hideous so we can get a quick approval”. Really what are they hoping to achieve? I can't believe this project has any supporters other than those who Lanterra are paying. Why not put some thought into it and propose something elegant, something that catches the imagination and admiration of all? Wouldn’t that make things easier at city hall?
Click to expand...

Is anyone listening to the navel-gazing roid-head in the corner?

You question "what they are hoping to achieve" when the real question is what are you hoping to achieve with posts like this? In fact, why don't you give us all a description of the tower(s) you hate so, since you seem to be too dense to listen to those who have actually seen drawings and who report that what's in the city document isn't accurate.

How don't these towers (which most here have yet to see) 'catch the imagination and admiration' of all? What's missing from the scheme that you'd change or replace? Without these sorts of details, your misplaced vituperation grows ever more tiresome with each comically blusterous and grossly incorrect rant.
 
Wow, PE, how did you read my mind and type almost exactly what I was thinking? Though I haven't seen the design, I had expressed my reservations in the 40 Scott St. thread about commenting on designs that haven't been released.
 
Projectend
...grows ever more tiresome ...
Click to expand...

^As does your smug condescension and abusive posts laced with personal attacks and not proper debating technique, which is limited to counterpointing the facts of an argument not insults.

Your behaviour is even worse than those who have not seen the "real deal" with their own eyes. You claim to have inside information and instead of enlightening everyone with your superior knowledge, you berate them for not being informed. Which is partially your own fault because you won't divulge what you know.

That is called Narcissistic Tyranny. You keep your subjects uneducated and then laud it over them that they are ignorant, in order to inflate your own sense of self importance.

Let me introduce you to a concept known as Noblesse Oblige: The idea that those blessed with great wealth, social standing or knowledge, should (though generosity of spirit) be kind to those less fortunate.
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
In fact, why don't you give us all a description of the tower(s) you hate so, since you seem to be too dense to listen to those who have actually seen drawings and who report that what's in the city document isn't accurate.
Click to expand...

That's good to know, but how can a developer get away with proposing a design in the site plan application that doesn't actually reflect the true design?
 
Traynor said:
^As does your smug condescension and abusive posts laced with personal attacks and not proper debating technique, which is limited to counterpointing the facts of an argument not insults.

Your behaviour is even worse than those who have not seen the "real deal" with their own eyes. You claim to have inside information and instead of enlightening everyone with your superior knowledge, you berate them for not being informed. Which is partially your own fault because you won't divulge what you know.

That is called Narcissistic Tyranny. You keep your subjects uneducated and then laud it over them that they are ignorant, in order to inflate your own sense of self importance.

Let me introduce you to a concept known as Noblesse Oblige: The idea that those blessed with great wealth, social standing or knowledge, should (though generosity of spirit) be kind to those less fortunate.
Click to expand...

I agree wholeheartedly with Noblesse Oblige. As well we should all try to be less combative and more compassionate towards each other. We are all in it together, and condescending remarks should not be tolerated. People wouldn't say half the things they say to each other on this forum if we were all meeting in person. Only someone like Trump would speak to others in a mean and condescending manner. Thats why he is the village idiot, and Barack Obama is the President. (...For that and many other reasons.)
 
Now, if the podium has to be a bunker-like behemoth to facilitate the parking structure, and you are going to cover the facade with glass, why not put some real thought into it and do something like this?

The podium of Market Wharf on lower Jarvis. (Ironically also designed by Clewes-less and yet not a complete monstrosity like 501) Now this ain't half bad and it even has some human scale to it. The use of materials is both modern and yet pays homage to the historical buildings in the vicinity.

Though I would extend the brick down to ground level in thinner columns under the canopy, in order to differentiate the commercial spaces and to better mimic separate buildings. (Affording the magic 20-30 foot rule of store-frontage, to keep pedestrian interest.)

5743166375_86050a736d_b.jpg

(Image courtesy Travis in the Market Wharf thread found here: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...Wharf-(18-Lower-Jarvis-Context-32s-aA)/page54 )

20110521219.jpg

(Image courtesy Jasonzed in the Market Wharf thread found here: http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...Wharf-(18-Lower-Jarvis-Context-32s-aA)/page54 )
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
Is anyone listening to the navel-gazing roid-head in the corner?
....., since you seem to be too dense to listen to those who have actually seen drawings and who report that what's in the city document isn't accurate.
misplaced vituperation grows ever more tiresome with each comically blusterous and grossly incorrect rant.
Click to expand...


Oh, my post is “vituperation”? What does that make your little diatribe?


I’ll admit I was a little over the top but really, if you believe you know something the rest of us don’t, why not clue us in? The reality is you don’t know anything more than the rest of us - and probably less - but would like make us think that you are somehow “connected” when truly you are not.

(good word though, "vituperation", who looked it up for you?)
 
Big Daddy said:
if you believe you know something the rest of us don’t, why not clue us in?
Click to expand...

Confidentiality agreements prevent people from sharing. I've seen many projects well before applications are submitted or released publicly. A lot of them I would love to share but not permitted to, while there are some others that I'd wish I hadn't seen....
 
^Granted and we all understand this practice... But not taunting everyone else with "I know something you don't know"-type posts should also be a clause certain people must agree to.

That or these people could actually have some consideration for others and calm our fears without actually giving away any details or being abusive and insulting in the process.
 
ProjectEnd is a long time member who has inside sources and has never led us astray before. His opinion is to be trusted. Can I suggest we all take a long breath and wait for proper renders to be released before screaming bloody hell.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top