Toronto 505 University | 212.89m | 64s | Cartareal Corp | BDP Quadrangle

Let's face it, in Toronto, no seminal building is safe...

poster,504x498,f8f8f8-pad,600x600,f8f8f8.jpg

Link
 
Northern Light said:
Not to sidetrack Alex' fine point...........

But I have a linguistic quibble................why 'seminal'....... I'm not one for re-writing language for its own sake or getting caught up in assorted, imagined 'isms'.........but seminal has a very specific original meaning.........

Of, or like Semen.

Why not ovate?

I mean why does only one sex'es sexual product get all the credit for innovation?

LOL

Yes, my tongue is in my cheek..........and yet..........

Edit to add:

It occurs to me that bias originates from the idea that the semen changes the egg.

I wonder why it occurred to no one that perhaps the egg changed the semen.
Click to expand...
Ok, that's one word I am not going to use again 😂
 
Builder: 1st Do No Harm said:
The current 505 University is a modernist masterpiece of beautiful proportions, lines, details and colour. Its loss would be a kick in the guts to Toronto's architectural heritage.

In my view it's the handsomest office building anywhere in the city. I love its distinctive roof which draws the eye up to stare for a bit, and the ravishing design of its service-floor window stand-ins, repeated also on the top floor. Many times I've wondered what's up on that mysterious level with its outdoor terrace, and wished I could see for myself.

I came to know it as the Digital Building (after Digital, now folded into HP). To my untutored eye as a new arrival living less than a km away at U of T, it was initially just another postwar office building among the many along University. But it caught my eye repeatedly until it was soon my favourite by far (the only other I liked being the Canada Life Bldg).

City of Toronto, don't make a mistake. Do not approve the demolition of the finest example of modernism in Toronto.
Click to expand...
Your instinct for good design/proportions is spot on, unlike the developer's. For me, this type of decision by developers shows that we need to continue to collectively raise the bar for design so that decision-makers appreciate good design in existing properties and when selecting architects for new projects. Elevating a city's design standards can't rely solely on good architects, designers, and preservationists - the clients that hire these professionals need to 'see' good design. Fortunately, some developers do understand good design even though they are not trained as architects/designers - as is the case with many laypeople, they just have good taste which is why those developers can commission exceptional buildings not just because of the architects they hired.
 
One persons trash is another persons treasure... you can't make somebody "like" a building if they don't.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top