Toronto X2 Condominiums | 160.93m | 49s | Lifetime | Wallman Architects

...and obviously, Wallman has been told to modify his design to look like a second phase. Either that, or Wallman has been replaced by aA.

42
 
Redroom Studios said:
it just sort of registered in my mind that X2 is Wallman Architects where as X was aA. Though looking at them both you'd assume the same architect. X2 seems to be a very direct copy of the first tower...
Click to expand...

It's only a rendering, but the colour slashes appear to be absent.
 
lordmandeep said:
x2.jpg
Click to expand...


I dunno....looks a bit clunky to me, whereas the first one looks sleek...must be the change of architect?
 
I'm not that impressed that it's almost identical. I figured it was going to be similar, but with enough differences to look different, if that makes any sense at all.
It looks like this one won't have the primary colourings.
 
it just sort of registered in my mind that X2 is Wallman Architects where as X was aA.
Click to expand...

to add onto MikeinTO's post and in case you didn't know - aA was known as Wallman Clewes Bergman at the turn of the millenium
 
while X Condos was interesting which mimics Mies' design elements concept and added to the architecture at Bloor + Jarvis ... however I find the simple copy and paste efforts of X2 Condos a shame and cheapens the impact of X Condos in the area ...

I would have expected a modified version of X to be proposed for X2, not just ctrl-C & ctrl-V :mad:
 
Mies' office towers were Cmd-C and Cmd-V to a great degree. Would the TD Centre look better if its (original) buildings were cousins instead of siblings?

42
 
Exactly. I don't understand why multiple copies of the same design is O.K. at King & Bay, but twins up here at Jarvis is a lame cop-out.

As long as there's some difference in height, I think this is great. A second tower will strengthen this design in a neighbourhood full of white 1960 slabs.
 
grey said:
Exactly. I don't understand why multiple copies of the same design is O.K. at King & Bay, but twins up here at Jarvis is a lame cop-out.
Click to expand...

It's yet to be seen but X2 looks square as opposed to rectangular, the colour slashes appear to have been eliminated and the materials (based solely on an early promotional rendering) seem a few shades lighter than X. Matching X's with the additional lowrise with 3000 sq. ft of retail at the street would sure work for me.

grey said:
As long as there's some difference in height, I think this is great. A second tower will strengthen this design in a neighbourhood full of white 1960 slabs.
Click to expand...

The height of the two seem pretty close - X, 453 ft. (138.1 m) vs. X2 (highrise), 449 ft., (137m).

Sir Novelty Fashion said:
This post just confirms what most of us always suspected: Mies used a Mac.

Libeskind's crystals, on the other hand, are strictly Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V...
Click to expand...

I'd liken the The Crystal more to Windows Vista SP1 :rolleyes:
 
Given the duo after duo after horrible precast duo seen all over the suburbs and even parts of downtown, what's wrong with one of the more attractive condos in recent years getting a fraternal twin? If you're gonna copy, copy something worth copying. X was neat precisely because it mimics the TD Centre.
 
yes, but in that case scale and relational space is a big part of the overall impact. Here, it seems the scale is identical while the positioning is rather incidental (constrained by property lines) and divided by a street. I guess we are all using our imaginations to envision what the pair will look like... would be nice to see some sort of rendering depicting both from a variety of angles.
 
That's some pretty intense density for a tiny little street like Charles. If Couture also goes ahead I could see things becoming a little claustrophobic toward Jarvis.

I also wonder how long the Gerstein Centre will survive. If part of the rationale for the location was to provide a sanctuary/oasis in the city I'm not sure how effective that will be now that the neighbourhood is being hyperintensified. That and given the rising value of the land it might make more sense for them to sell and use the proceeds to buy a larger/nicer facility elsewhere where they could serve more people. Maybe X3 on that site?
 
I can't imagine much going on the site of the Gerstein center (based on its footprint) other than a small low rise component, perhaps an x3 but exclusive condo, ie. 1 unit per floor for 10 floors, that would be really neat in a mini version of the x and x2.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top