ptbotrmpfn
Senior Member
I still Feel they should have gone with the bands sticking out off the box like it was intended. especially now that its green (ish). that part is not to late to change or even down then road though.
Toronto Theatre Park | 156.96m | 47s | Lamb Dev Corp | a—A
- Thread starter ProjectEnd
- Start date
RyeJay
New Member
Exactly.
Sure, this condo tower is "fine." Toronto, though, is suppose to be better than just fine. Certainly, downtown Toronto is deserving enough of projects that do not break from what they have proposed: and from what the City/OMB has approved, frankly.
Theatre Park is a net win for the core. The residential density will contribute to the downtown's economy. Situations like this green box, though, are avoidable -- and I wish government would implement the necessary approval expectations and subsequent penalties when/if proposal promises aren't kept.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Developers should be fined/penalized for deviating from the approved model.
steveve
Senior Member
Taken today. A beautiful building. I really hope that Massey Tower ends up looking this good in terms of quality. Super skinny buildings like this one hopefully become a trending thing in future waves of condos.
Zeiss
Active Member
My opinion is that any cheapening changes should be considered as fraud. The developers get the money from the buyers under false pretence, promising to build something but rarely deliver.
Ramako
Moderator
As good as this tower already looks (despite the mechanical box) I think the design will only really come together when the bands meet the balconies (as can currently be seen on the lower floors) to create the effect of the the tower actually being bound.
egotrippin
Senior Member
Another aA building marred by compromised mechanical level treatment. Seriously, what's the deal lately? The mechanical boxes at the two new Distillery condos look like crap, and nothing like the askew stacks in the renders. Before that was the mess at X which ruined the sleek, TD Centre-inspired effect. It's really frustrating, because in all cases you have well-designed buildings with poorly executed and distracting caps that ended up nothing like the renders.
I'm really getting sick of being duped. Name a project in this city and in many cases you'll find details that have been deviated from, cheapened out, or just plain omitted.
I'm really getting sick of being duped. Name a project in this city and in many cases you'll find details that have been deviated from, cheapened out, or just plain omitted.
Last edited:
Tewder
Senior Member
I'm sure there's plenty of fine print that protects them from any such charges, surely.
I was thinking just the same thing recently, not necessarily with aA specifically but with Toronto design in general. We seem to be fairly consistent in our inability to resolve a design at its height. Maybe it's common elsewhere, I don't know.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Investors probably don't really care too much. I figure if the buying public made a stink about this stuff, this problem wouldn't be so prevalent.
Northern Magus
Active Member
Well there's always misrepresentation, or possibly even fraudulent misrepresentation. You'll just need something like $80-150k for legal fees, 2-6 years worth of patience, and be willing to end up on the wrong side of the costs rule if unsuccessful. Assuming you even have a meritorious case.
But sending someone to jail over a render? I understand your frustration, but in my view the fault lies more with the city since they're involved in the permits, zoning, and approvals.
urbandreamer
recession proof
16 August 2014: Good vs Evil
arvelomcquaig
Active Member
Ugh. The top completely ruins this for me. It looks like a stupid little cap placed on a child’s head to humiliate them.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Besides changing the glass, I can't see how they will improve the top part.
ushahid
Senior Member
WiddleBittyKitty
Felis catus
16 August 2014: Good vs Evil
Uh, it already looks like it's starting to change.