modernizt
Senior Member
This reads like a parody marketing piece.
This reads like a parody marketing piece.
Benito
Senior Member
Amazing views from Uptown Benito! ^
Today:
Not as good as your photos Steve, but you're welcome.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
It also costs a lot more to terrace a building. A bill not all developers are willing to foot.
Mongo
Senior Member
Glad I'm not the only one who like BSN
Am I the only one who remembers how BSN was being relentlessly slagged when it was under construction? It seems like almost everybody hated it.
Just goes to show that opinions made during construction, before a building is completed, do not always have great predictive value.
TheKingEast
Senior Member
It's still atrocious imo.
Agreed. It's one of the clumsiest condominium developments of Toronto's last decade. The upper tower is especially poorly tacked on, with no real attempt to integrate it. They're just counting on nobody looking very critically at it, or at least they're not caring that some of us do.
42
42
Benito
Senior Member
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
Almost everyone, but there is at least one member who thought it is "great", and being utterly obnoxious about it.
AoD
junctionist
Senior Member
It doesn't deserve all the criticism. It handles the awkward site with grace thanks to the L massing. It doesn't overpower its heritage neighbour in spite of being significantly bigger thanks to the terracing. The tower could have been better, but it's hardly a disaster.
khris
Senior Member
As a mod, you really should choose your words a bit more carefully. Are you trying to make members stop posting on the forums?
khris
Senior Member
I agree. There are a lot of hideous buildings in this city, and this one is not one of them.
Wait, isn't this the Chaz thread?
urbandreamer
recession proof
BSN is awful. It sits on the site like a hulking tacky fauxhistoric mcmansion does on a side street in Mimico. It is beige, cheap and phony.
I do not debate materials--that's a $/sqft issue. I debate design. Get aA to clad a building in any material and they will get the design right. A good architect could design a proper historicist building and it would look fantastic. BSN and Chaz fail because the key ingredient--a quality architect--is missing.
I do not debate materials--that's a $/sqft issue. I debate design. Get aA to clad a building in any material and they will get the design right. A good architect could design a proper historicist building and it would look fantastic. BSN and Chaz fail because the key ingredient--a quality architect--is missing.
junctionist
Senior Member
It doesn't pretend to be anything more than it is: modern high-rise infill with an interest in history, if not a commitment to historical recreation. Is it cheap? Not really. Everything is holding up. It looks brand new. That brickwork on the podium is unique. The terracing helps to lighten its presence. Chaz will also be fine--probably better than BSN if not as good as Casa.
Bad Bear
Active Member
BSN is awful for you. I think sometimes you should put a "IMHO" at the end of your sentence. Beauty is in the eye of the beholder, but I guess you need to revise your values scale
Maybe you should try to visit some other country, then you'll get a whole new perception of the word awful, that you like to use so lightly.
Last edited:
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Of course it's all opinion, but some things are uglier than others. I can accept different styles. There are buildings I don't like, but can appreciate the architecture. But BSN looks like crap IMO because of the ugly green they used. Along with the weird proportions and ugly stucco. There are many things I like about it, but it falls short. Reminds me of Uptown a few blocks away. Terrible execution.