Toronto Burano | ?m | 48s | Lanterra | a—A

This has turned out so well. The shape of the tower, the terrific restoration of the McLaughlin Motors building and the jewel box restaurant at the north end - just wonderful. Hopefully some decent retail will come to this stretch.
 
15 December 2012: Condo bears say foreign investors control this building: I spot some...or do I?

20121215162417.jpg


20121215162305.jpg


20121215162210.jpg
 
Great western views from the upper floors, but the layouts are appalling! I was arguing with Spire about how condos aren't really designed to be perfect but rather to make the developer money so really it comes down to the architect's "window dressing" aesthetic choices and certainly checking out a YouTube video of a typical unit you'd have to agree!
 
As I see it most buildings only have one or two (at best) good one and two bedroom designs, the rest are crap. But at least the outsides are getting better as the newer buildings are going up with many promising ones yet to go. I still call Burano a great success.
 
urbandreamer said:
Great western views from the upper floors, but the layouts are appalling! I was arguing with Spire about how condos aren't really designed to be perfect but rather to make the developer money so really it comes down to the architect's "window dressing" aesthetic choices and certainly checking out a YouTube video of a typical unit you'd have to agree!
Click to expand...

Can you elaborate on what you mean by 'designed to be perfect?' Perfect for whom?
 
Perfect for the owner. You know--walk into the living room and the view is just "perfect." Meaning the architect lined up the windows exactly to frame the view. Or that the interior texture compliments the exterior surroundings--wood in the woods perhaps? The finishings and proportions are "perfect." etc.

My point: Majority of Toronto condos are for the mass market. They are Chevy's to the Shim-Sutcliffe "Rolls Royce" Rosedale home.

The reference: Spire's critique of my "mass market" 460 Yonge redesign. Like at Burano, it was designed to look good from the outside aka "condo window dressing" with interiors really driven by market demand--designed for humans, but not really "designed" to perfection.

School is one thing; reality is well, reality. :)

Am I making sense?

(I think to be great at this sort of mass market housing, it helps to have both a design and manufacturing background. ie, if you've actually assembled a complex product (eg cars) at some point, you'll appreciate the benefits of designing with ease of assembly in mind. Or designed a product--dealt with suppliers, logistics, marketing, sales, budgets vs the original "vision." I've BTDT. So I get it--I hope.:))
 
Last edited:
urbandreamer said:
Great western views from the upper floors, but the layouts are appalling! I was arguing with Spire about how condos aren't really designed to be perfect but rather to make the developer money so really it comes down to the architect's "window dressing" aesthetic choices and certainly checking out a YouTube video of a typical unit you'd have to agree!
Click to expand...

Anytime I see threshold trim between the same two surfaces, I gag. I don't get the big strip right at the entrance. Terrible.

The views are beautiful especially with the dark framed windows....but finishes are Home Depot.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top