Toronto Ten York Street Condos | 224.02m | 65s | Tridel | Wallman Architects
- Thread starter maestro
- Start date
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Going east on the Gardiner this thing is a beast, and the best looking of them all
Last edited:
DtTO
Active Member
and the best looking of them all
Yeah, this is proof that the architect is more important than the developer when it comes to quality. Ten York is built by arguably the worst developer in Toronto (or maybe second to Canderel in that regard), yet it turned out quite well thanks to Wallman. A good architect will insist on quality material and good aesthetic, which is why I'll never buy the aA defenders' arguments in this forum. If you spew out iterative garbage like Casa I, II, III, etc. with nothing but wraparound balconies, you deserve to be shamed for it. It's not simply a matter of the developer being greedy. If you don't want to soil your name, don't take on a project that will accomplish that, it's that simple.
smably
Senior Member
I don't buy this at all. You do realize that 300 Front was also Wallman, right? Wallman and aA have good and bad buildings, just like any other architect. It comes down to vision and budget, and that's on the developer.
SImcoeHotDog
New Member
it did turn out nice at certain angles but i find that it looks rather bulky and square from the south. Also i always had an assumption that Tridel is one of the best and most reliable developers out there.
Yeah, I'm going to pile on too: rubbish. Wallman can turn out excellent buildings, but his 365 Church for Menkes is amongst the worst erected in Toronto in the last decade, and as @smably noted, there's 300 Front. It looked great in renderings, and then Tridel totally hammered the exterior with The Cheapening™.
In regards to worst developer? Tridel's not close to being worst. They are stepping up their game lately on the exterior with some of their developments, mostly downtown, but for customer satisfaction they have consistently gotten great marks for years.
42
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
From a design perspective Tridel have really upped their game compared to their offerings even 5 years ago (in the downtown area) - though they still get tripped up in the execution part.
As to Wallman - the issue is lack of choosiness and not walking away from clients with absolutely no intention of executing design excellence. That's a business decision - and rightly or wrongly they will have to take their share of the blame on this choice.
AoD
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Found these in the UT Flickr Pool:
Toronto skyline at night by Michael Monastyrskyj, on Flickr
Golden Hour by Empty Quarter, on Flickr
Toronto skyline at night by Michael Monastyrskyj, on FlickrGolden Hour by Empty Quarter, on Flickrmodernizt
Senior Member
Wallman has mouths to feed. If you think architecture firms can afford to "walk away from clients" you are being naive.
Architects don't get to pick their clients, unless they are one of a very rare few in this city.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
ADRM
Senior Member
Found these in the UT Flickr Pool:
Great shot of a few beautiful aA designs.
A Torontonian Now
Senior Member
I am going to miss that bold band of red once it's gone. I'm not sure I want a building with something that loud out there in the sky permanently, but I keep thinking that something bold up top one of our towers wouldn't be so bad (if done right: I'm not sure what 'done right' is though).
42
42
old boy
Senior Member
A visual point of interest atop this monolith would be pleasant surprise, ( dare I say it, a necessary rescue). Apart from it's wedge-shaped footprint, I see this as one slice of blandness in a most visible place .
