Toronto The Brixton | 45.41m | 12s | CentreCourt | Graziani + Corazza

211532
 
That's not what I was thinking.

What I'm remembering now, however, is your response to this @AlbertC; you don't seem so put off by that Graziani + Corazza design!

The point is, as I seem to have to make every couple of weeks, is that it comes down to what the developer is willing to pay for. If it's only enough for cheap window wall, like here, then it will look like what we're getting here, no matter who the architect is. No idea if 1440 Lawrence at Keele will turn out as good as the initial design looks, but it shows that G+C can create fine designs, just like their now demolished sales pavilion for Monarch (then Mattamy) at Humber Bay Shores did, like J. Davis House does (it's quite a good example of that kind of neo-traditional style), and like Y&S Condos could be if Tribute spends the money on good cladding, just to name a few examples.

I can trot out examples of good work from just about every firm that gets slagged on UT regularly (IBI, Kirkor, Turner Fleischer, etc.), and I'm eternally surprised when longtime UTers slam the architect independent of any other factor: I'd expect that you guys would gradually pick up on how the game works a little better, so it's surprising just to see more and more ranting, and not to see a better comprehension of all of this.

42
 
interchange42 said:
That's not what I was thinking.

What I'm remembering now, however, is your response to this @AlbertC; you don't seem so put off by that Graziani + Corazza design!

The point is, as I seem to have to make every couple of weeks, is that it comes down to what the developer is willing to pay for. If it's only enough for cheap window wall, like here, then it will look like what we're getting here, no matter who the architect is. No idea if 1440 Lawrence at Keele will turn out as good as the initial design looks, but it shows that G+C can create fine designs, just like their now demolished sales pavilion for Monarch (then Mattamy) at Humber Bay Shores did, like J. Davis House does (it's quite a good example of that kind of neo-traditional style), and like Y&S Condos could be if Tribute spends the money on good cladding, just to name a few examples.

I can trot out examples of good work from just about every firm that gets slagged on UT regularly (IBI, Kirkor, Turner Fleischer, etc.), and I'm eternally surprised when longtime UTers slam the architect independent of any other factor: I'd expect that you guys would gradually pick up on how the game works a little better, so it's surprising just to see more and more ranting, and not to see a better comprehension of all of this.

42
Click to expand...

Casual spur of the moment meme on my part there, 42. But I totally get your message. I would say that J.Davis House has turned out to be a rather positive addition, and exceeded original expectations. Although my remark about 1440 Lawrence was more about feeling good on getting a development to help urbanize that awkward corner in general, and neutral on considerations of design or who the architecture is.

I would admit that part of the swipe against G+C there was some preconceived prejudice as a high ratio of their past buildings ended up being on the butt end of the results spectrum. But otherwise, duly noted on the need for the full picture. We'll work on it. ;)
 
Some bricks are onsite for the middle building. Kind of a purple maroon colour so at least the blocks will be getting some variation. It’s nice to see hand laid bricks being carried right to the top of the building Vs panels. I know these aren’t anything to write home about, but it’s really helping this stretch of dufferin feel more alive and urban.
 
Just stumbled upon this thread and didn't know there was this much action happening on Dufferin Street. Has this development ever been for sale or will it be fully finished before purchasing opportunities?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top