Toronto Concord Canada House | 231.97m | 74s | Concord Adex | Arcadis

He means the posts about sports - not the thread itself
 
Great news! Hopefully it won't be just another CityPlace building but only taller. This would be a great opportunity to do something exciting, that stands out among the green/blue glass boxes in the area.
 
Southcore said:
I bet the city and Concord will probably settle on something like 68 and 60. Either way, good news. Hopefully this can be a Maple Leaf Square style development (sans the atrocious architecture, though with P+S, I'm not so sure) for the area.
Click to expand...

Why does MLS get so much criticism these days? When it was built, most people loved it. They loved the new public space, the mix of uses, the metropolitan scale and sleek modern design of the podium, as well as the thin glass towers. The only bad thing about it is the green glass.
 
I think Southcore's post was more a knock at the architecture, and if anything, a praise of the planning and scale.
 
Ramako said:
Assuming that the 10-storey podium will contain all the office and retail, I'd guess that the 79 storey tower would be around 270 metres. When viewed from the lake, this would easily be most prominent structure in the skyline, save for the CN Tower. I really hope they didn't go with Page+Steele.
Click to expand...

Lost In The Wilds said:
Page & Plant would be a better bet.
Click to expand...

Yeah I know eh, like no self-respecting company would ever hire them, right...?









Marcanadian said:

Delta by Marcanadian, on Flickr
Click to expand...

Sure their are better firms out there that are far more consistent, but it's still amazing how little credit they get for crafting one of the most elegant buildings(easily one of the top 10) of the boom. Most of their work isn't very memorable, but neither are they the unmitigated disasters that some people seem to be suggesting.
 
The reason why some buildings look cheap and ugly is mainly due to the market. If you're building a condo in Yorkville for wealthy buyers you have different constraints than if you are building way out on Sheppard or Cityplace for less wealthy buyers.

Developers and architects who build cheaper, less attractive buildings are selling to a different segment of the market and face cost constraints consistent with the need to keep prices low. It shouldn't be a shock that when those same architects are given a bigger budget they suddenly produce a nicer product.
 
vegeta_skyline said:
Yeah I know eh, like no self-respecting company would ever hire them, right...?


Sure their are better firms out there that are far more consistent, but it's still amazing how little credit they get for crafting one of the most elegant buildings(easily one of the top 10) of the boom. Most of their work isn't very memorable, but neither are they the unmitigated disasters that some people seem to be suggesting.
Click to expand...

Southcore Delta is nice but it's far from typical of their work. It's very much an exception. It would be far more informative to look at the other work they've done for that developer, which has generally been pretty mediocre. That's not good enough for what will be the second most prominent structure in the city from the south and west.
 
vegeta:

I think it would be overly optimistic to compare the quality of a business hotel to a developer with a less than stellar track record on design and execution. The very fact that we had at least two previous iterations (Busby, aA) and ended up with P+S certainly does not inspire confidence.

AoD
 
It all depends on what sort of budget parameters Page+Steele was given. If they were given a large budget, they can create a fine design, with high-quality materials. If they are given an "economy" budget, they will produce an economy design.

I do not believe that there is a huge difference in creative talent between Page+Steele and firms like aA or Harari Pontarini. The difference is that Page+Steele is perfectly willing to design lower-budget buildings if that is what their employer wants, and as it turns out, the majority of their commissions are in that group.

So it depends on what Concord Adex is willing to pay for these towers. Are they going to cheap out, or do they want to make a splash with quality design and materials?
 
Mongo said:
It all depends on what sort of budget parameters Page+Steele was given. If they were given a large budget, they can create a fine design, with high-quality materials. If they are given an "economy" budget, they will produce an economy design.

I do not believe that there is a huge difference in creative talent between Page+Steele and firms like aA or Harari Pontarini. The difference is that Page+Steele is perfectly willing to design lower-budget buildings if that is what their employer wants, and as it turns out, the majority of their commissions are in that group.

So it depends on what Concord Adex is willing to pay for these towers. Are they going to cheap out, or do they want to make a splash with quality design and materials?
Click to expand...

Compare their respective portfolios and see the quality of the work. And if Concord is willing to hire a firm that is perfectly willing to design lower-budget buildings, what does that tell you?

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
And if Concord is willing to hire a firm that is perfectly willing to design lower-budget buildings, what does that tell you?
Click to expand...

Nothing, really. We know that they can design perfectly fine towers (see Southcore Delta, Chaz, The Met, 88 Scott) if they are given the budget for them.
 
Not all home buyers are wealthy enough to live in the buildings we all appreciate looking at, yet they are still in the market for a home. That's why we get a mix of nice and cheap buildings.

Cheap buildings are not the product of bad architects or bad developers, they are the result of the housing market.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top