Toronto Picasso Condos | 128.62m | 39s | Mattamy Homes | Teeple Architects

[interchange42]

I'd be willing to bet more people would say that condo render and that Montreal building are ugly than not.

"That Montreal building" is better known as Habitat '67 and was designed by Moshe Safdie as a residential component for Expo '67. It's famous in fact, is celebrated around the world, and has waiting list to move into it more than long enough to prove it.

42

 

[Dane]

... well...

I love it, so... yeah.

and if I were still living in Toronto than i would definitely consider buying there.

 

[adma]

I'd be willing to bet more people would say that condo render and that Montreal building are ugly than not.

Yeah, and they're the sort who might prefer this.

Or, if they hate the suburbs that much, this

 

[gei]

Yeah, and they're the sort who might prefer this.

Or, if they hate the suburbs that much, this

I think that looks MUCH better than this proposal.

 

[urbandreamer]

^Yikes. No wonder I hate 90% of Torontonians' taste.

 

[grey]

I'd be willing to bet more people would say that condo render and that Montreal building are ugly than not.

That doesn't mean anything. "People" in general think RoCP looks better than Spire and French Quarter looks better than MoZo, at least according to the Pugs.

 

[lister]

Or, if they hate the suburbs that much, this

That's more pleasing to my eye compared to the jarring condo render here though I wouldn't say it would make any top-whatever list of buildings I like. At least it's not an all-glass office-tower-wannabe.

 

[gei]

That doesn't mean anything. "People" in general think RoCP looks better than Spire and French Quarter looks better than MoZo, at least according to the Pugs.

If most people think building A looks better than building B, then can't we say that building A therefore looks better than building B?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Popularity does not equate to quality.

AoD

 

[lister]

If most people think building A looks better than building B, then can't we say that building A therefore looks better than building B?

No, they (building B people) say that those building A people are idiots.

 

[lister]

Popularity does not equate to quality.

True, McDonalds is proof of that.

 

[lister]

That doesn't mean anything. "People" in general think RoCP looks better than Spire and French Quarter looks better than MoZo, at least according to the Pugs.

Given those comparisons, I'd have to say I agree with the Pugs. I don't see what the appeal of Spire and MoZo are. I find both to be rather unpleasing, cold and lacking in any personality. Same goes for that thing out in the Distillery District after it gets above street level. And of course my soon-to-be next door neighbour Glas (though I like the black brick at street level.)

I'm not saying I whack off to RoCP and FQ every night nor do they make my list of interesting buildings I like. Given the choices presented above though...

Ah well. In the grand scheme of things it's good to have different looking buildings in the city. I'd hate to see massive replication even of buildings that I do like.

 

[grey]

If most people think building A looks better than building B, then can't we say that building A therefore looks better than building B?

If the world worked that way, Mozart would have nothing on Britney Spears.

What good is anything if it doesn't appeal to the common idiot layperson with little interest in the subject? Pretty naive way of looking at things.

 

[CityPlaceN1]

I'm not saying I whack off to RoCP and FQ every night

So every second night then?

 

[lister]

So every second night then?

Sure, but not to those buildings...