Toronto Yonge & Rich Condominiums | 156.35m | 46s | Great Gulf | a—A

stjames2queenwest said:
that article is a pile of trash.
Click to expand...

Why? Because it isn't unbearably positive and written as if a representative of the developer is standing over the shoulder of the writer like UT articles are? It's a lazy article but it's not exactly trying to take itself seriously either.
 
It lacks anything constructive. It's a dumb project name. Sure. But the article gives no other reason for its highly negative tone. I don't see why the time was wasted to even post it.
 
stjames2queenwest said:
It lacks anything constructive. It's a dumb project name. Sure. But the article gives no other reason for its highly negative tone. I don't see why the time was wasted to even post it.
Click to expand...

I also take issue with the paragraph that said Y&R is "within a short walk of one of the most economically blighted neighbourhoods in downtown Toronto". What a bizarre thing to say considering it's in close proximity to Ryerson, St Lawrence and a number of other nice areas. It's not like it's across the street from St James Town.
 
wolfewood said:
Why? Because it isn't unbearably positive and written as if a representative of the developer is standing over the shoulder of the writer like UT articles are? It's a lazy article but it's not exactly trying to take itself seriously either.
Click to expand...

Exactly - it's a lazy "article" that provides no real information aside from showing off that the writer is a crank about this development for no substantive or tangible reason. If you're going to have an opinion - particularly a strong one - at least back it up with some reasoning. This thing reads more like a comment section than an article.
 
"the wince-inducingly titled 45-storey tower’s design was whipped up by Architects Alliance"

Whipped up? I'm all for more constructive criticism of architecture in this city, but that's not constructive or informative.

"this handsome, totally inappropriately-monikered edifice will rise as an elegant middle finger over the city’s core"

Apparently Kelli thinks surface parking is better. Hard to know what Kelli thinks, though, as the article is just a bunch of smartass put-downs strung together without any substance. Yes, the name is terrible - but that issue was well covered five years ago.
 
salsa said:
I also take issue with the paragraph that said Y&R is "within a short walk of one of the most economically blighted neighbourhoods in downtown Toronto". What a bizarre thing to say considering it's in close proximity to Ryerson, St Lawrence and a number of other nice areas. It's not like it's across the street from St James Town.
Click to expand...

I think the blighted neighbourhood refers to Moss Park, which is indeed less than 10 minutes walk. But again St Lawrence is within that walking distance too.
I agree the tone of the article is pretty disgusting. And other than the name, it didn't even explain why there is so much hate.
 
ksun said:
I think the blighted neighbourhood refers to Moss Park, which is indeed less than 10 minutes walk. But again St Lawrence is within that walking distance too.
I agree the tone of the article is pretty disgusting. And other than the name, it didn't even explain why there is so much hate.
Click to expand...

Disgusting? How so?
 
Skeezix said:
"the wince-inducingly titled 45-storey tower’s design was whipped up by Architects Alliance"

Whipped up? I'm all for more constructive criticism of architecture in this city, but that's not constructive or informative.

"this handsome, totally inappropriately-monikered edifice will rise as an elegant middle finger over the city’s core"

Apparently Kelli thinks surface parking is better. Hard to know what Kelli thinks, though, as the article is just a bunch of smartass put-downs strung together without any substance. Yes, the name is terrible - but that issue was well covered five years ago.
Click to expand...

The substance is in the now toronto article it links to. Article mentions nothing about surface parking.
 
For a "whipped up" design those balcony patterns are pretty elaborate and exciting. If this building was able to make human gesture l'd think it'd be more inclined to give a high five than the finger.
 
nrb said:
I prefer the torontoist article http://torontoist.com/2015/11/ground-breaks-on-worst-named-condo-development-in-toronto/
Click to expand...

Skeezix said:
"the wince-inducingly titled 45-storey tower’s design was whipped up by Architects Alliance"

Whipped up? I'm all for more constructive criticism of architecture in this city, but that's not constructive or informative.

"this handsome, totally inappropriately-monikered edifice will rise as an elegant middle finger over the city’s core"

Apparently Kelli thinks surface parking is better. Hard to know what Kelli thinks, though, as the article is just a bunch of smartass put-downs strung together without any substance. Yes, the name is terrible - but that issue was well covered five years ago.
Click to expand...

nrb said:
The substance is in the now toronto article it links to. Article mentions nothing about surface parking.
Click to expand...

No, the substance is not in the Now article to which Kelli Korducki links in her Torontoist piece. A link to an article about low-income housing, rooming houses and hostels being at risk due to development pressures does not give Ms. Korducki's piece any substance, nor does it explain why she thinks the Now article is somehow relevant to the redevelopment of a surface parking on the doorstep of the Financial District. It certainly doesn't expand on her "critique" (I'm being generous in referring to her name-calling by that word) of the architecture. If she thinks there are connections to this development and to its architecture and the risk to housing in the East Downtown, then by all means she should say so. But she didn't. Her piece was thin and lazy, and is not improved by the fact that she included a link to Mr. Spurr's article. My post here doesn't become a substantive piece on the fight for human rights in Burma just because I stick in a non-sequitur link. For the same reason, the link in Ms. Korducki's article didn't help it either.
 
nrb said:
Disgusting? How so?
Click to expand...

Because it is negative about the project for no legitimate reason other than the name. If that is a middle finger, I just wish it were taller, or there would be more middle fingers like this east of Yonge.

"Gentrification" of downtown east is simply fantastic. Can't wait to see the whole area becoming attractive to ordinary folks with actual jobs who contribute to the health of the city every day.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top