Toronto Aura at College Park | 271.87m | 78s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

It's that time of year. If your house isn't quite as nice as the others in the neighbourhood, you can achieve a passing grade or even praise, if you add some of these:

Aura Icicle Lights.jpg


:cool:
 

Attachments

  • Aura Icicle Lights.jpg
    Aura Icicle Lights.jpg
    74.2 KB · Views: 1,259
Oh... what it could've been:

aura.jpg

Using Interchange's photo from above.
 

Attachments

  • aura.jpg
    aura.jpg
    164 KB · Views: 1,255
Last edited:
Interesting edit you have there Tuscani. Pretty cool to have a visual to accompany all of the "what-if" posts about what Aura would look like if the design for the curving upper portion continued to the base..
 
That's the shot that most people, and pretty much all out of towners will see of Aura as they progress north on Yonge... Looks pretty impressive, IMO...
 
Tewder said:
This tower is solidly 'ok'. There's little wonder it is better appreciated when seen from afar or at night. It's a shame it's not better though, given the size and prominence of location. We throw around the word 'landmark' or icon here a lot but this was arguably the best location with the most potential for one, it only required some more refined design and attention to detail. This could have been Toronto's 'Empire State' moment, so to speak.
Click to expand...

Perhaps the tower part is "ok", but everything else about this project is a testament to the utter failure that has been Toronto City Planning. Fire the lot of them John Tory...starting at the top (send small-town thinking Keesmatt back to Perterborough where she belongs). That's what you get when you hire a chief planner with zero experience.

So what do we have to show for Aura (not including allowing Canderel Stoneridge to build 1200 units on site previously)....A dog's breakfast for architecture, big box retail above ground, a rabbit warren asian flea market below ground. They couldn't have made the underground connection to the existing College Park more complicated if they hired someone to do so.

You'd think after all that we would at least have a much improved Barbara Ann Scott Park. But wait...it isn't. I guess they had to drop the Barbara Ann Scott part, seeing as it wont have a skating rink any more. The city let the condo residents decide the usage, so it will basically be for the condo residents interests...not the public's. But we don't have anything, as it's been sitting there derelict and run down for years.

And this project got a hight and density bonus???????????????????????????????????
While Mirvish-Gehry gets trashed???????

We can have nicer things if we fire the idiots, that the idiots we voted for hired.
 
freshcutgrass said:
You'd think after all that we would at least have a much improved Barbara Ann Scott Park. But wait...it isn't. I guess they had to drop the Barbara Ann Scott part, seeing as it wont have a skating rink any more. The city let the condo residents decide the usage, so it will basically be for the condo residents interests...not the public's. But we don't have anything, as it's been sitting there derelict and run down for years.
Click to expand...

I thought the park was being re-done as part of the condo deal? The terms of that deal have changed?
 
Miscreant said:
I thought the park was being re-done as part of the condo deal? The terms of that deal have changed?
Click to expand...

Eventually the park will be re-done, but with only $3 million, it will be nothing more than a cheaply landscaped walkway.

So...as far as public realm improvements go, we get less than we had as a result of giving CS the right to build 2200 units. The biggest public benefit we got out of this deal was the disappearance of a surface parking lot.

Compare this to Mirvish-Gehry with a similar number of units and how the same city planning office called the architecture "trite" and poo-pooed and pissed away a world class public realm benefit.
 
freshcutgrass said:
Perhaps the tower part is "ok", but everything else about this project is a testament to the utter failure that has been Toronto City Planning. Fire the lot of them John Tory...starting at the top (send small-town thinking Keesmatt back to Perterborough where she belongs). That's what you get when you hire a chief planner with zero experience.
Click to expand...

You're blaming the chief planner for this?
 
Wasn't this design the result of some kind of design competition and OMB settlement? Not sure what either the chief planner or the planning department have to do with it.
 
I would like to see a rule put in place that once a building goes over 40 stories, it is declared a landmark building and subject to different standards. They should be required to have an international design competition or get approval from a design panel. They need to be required to use top quality materials and have a great design. The system we have now is not producing great buildings, so it's time to look at new ways of getting buildings that are innovative and beautiful.

When I look up lists of the greatest works of architecture in the world, I want to see at least 1 building from Toronto, in there. (sadly, I don't right now)
 
You guys realist that this is the tallest building built since scotia plaza in 1988, it's structure surpass all except Scotia plaza and FCP itself ona realistic view from the human eye
 
salsa said:
You're blaming the chief planner for this?
Click to expand...

I'm blaming everybody. But you can't fire everybody...especially elected people who hired Keesmaat.

But you can fire Keesmaat.

This POS gets a pass...and then a height and density BONUS (same height and density issues as MG).
Mirvish-Gehry project gets big thumbs down

Something is clearly working against our best interests.


'"As a City we must learn to despise mediocrity. We can't accept what we've accepted in the past. 'Good enough' is no longer good enough."

Mayor David Miller
Architecture and Urban Design Awards, May 16, 2005
Click to expand...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top