Toronto Concord Sky | 299m | 85s | Concord Adex | Kohn Pedersen Fox

Agree skipping is stupid.

Here's an unrelated rundown of Chinese numbers, and their supposed "meaning"

Four - Death
Six - Flow (as in, grow up and become an upstanding citizen)
Eight - Multiply (as in, get rich)
Nine - Longlasting (as in, live a long life)
 
Yeah...I'm in the same boat as many here. As this type of floor number skipping makes me want to Hitchens slap any developer who does this - not that I would, as that guy had a lot of issues too.

That said, while I try to be patient and open to others' views on the supernatural or lack there of, I'm not sure I would want to be in residential building that every floor was chocked full of religious symbols either in the name of increasing peeps' standing in life who believe in it. That stuff should be saved for houses of worship and religious institutions, where one knows what they getting into if they go there. Buildings outside of that should remain neutral and secular if they plan to cater to a wider audience, IMO. This includes the belief in luck.
 
Last edited:
The other option is the Donald Trump approach - and just make up the floor numbers to make your building 'feel' taller 😂
Though the tower was built with 58 floors, Mr. Trump later explained to The New York Times that because there was a soaring pink marble atrium and 19 commercial floors at the bottom, he could see no good reason not to list the first residential floor as the 30th floor. The pinnacle became the 68th — the height that appears in marketing materials, online search results and news articles to this day.

In time, creative numbering became almost as much of a building signature as the Trump name. Other tactics included counting underground parking lots and other below-grade floors in the total
Click to expand...
 
Saturday:

DSC_0855_PC.jpg

DSC_0858_PC.jpg

DSC_0864_PC.jpg

DSC_0865_PC.jpg


It would be nice if Concord's first order of business was to clean up all the trash that's been thrown over the hoarding....

DSC_0866_PC.jpg

DSC_0867_PC.jpg
 
Lachlan Holmes said:
It would be nice if Concord's first order of business was to clean up all the trash that's been thrown over the hoarding....

View attachment 353427
View attachment 353428
Click to expand...
I think these pictures of garbage are a pretty good analogy of what most of us think of Concord as a developer.

Knowing them they might just keep the garbage on site by burying it deep, and quite frankly it would suit this development just fine.
 
I think we are all a bit miffed from what KPF originally presented to what we are apparently ending up with. We went from something very sleek, modern and elegant to something to put it mildly busy. If this was a 30 storey building I wouldn't think twice but at current size it will dominate the skyline for many blocks in every direction. What really concerns me is I can't see a way or process deterring these unfortunate series of events repeating for other developments in the future.
 
The Preservationist said:
I think we are all a bit miffed from what KPF originally presented to what we are apparently ending up with. We went from something very sleek, modern and elegant to something to put it mildly busy. If this was a 30 storey building I wouldn't think twice but at current size it will dominate the skyline for many blocks in every direction. What really concerns me is I can't see a way or process deterring these unfortunate series of events repeating for other developments in the future.
Click to expand...
Someway of guaranteeing the quality design/materials would remain the same in the changing of hands even if the change over was a result of insolvency?
 
I've long tried to promote the idea that buildings whose relative size makes them stand out in the community/city skyline should have to meet much higher design standards via the Design Advisory Committee or whatever, since so many residents have to view them everyday and they make up a sense (if not a genious) of place!
 
If they are in fact playing a numbers game with the floors, then why not just complete the numbers game and add 101cm to the building so it can at least achieve supertall status.
 
elad said:
I've long tried to promote the idea that buildings whose relative size makes them stand out in the community/city skyline should have to meet much higher design standards via the Design Advisory Committee or whatever, since so many residents have to view them everyday and they make up a sense (if not a genious) of place!
Click to expand...
* Design Review Panel (DRP)
We have one city-wide DRP, the Waterfront DRP that operates within the Designated Waterfront Area, the Toronto Community Housing DRP, and the Metrolinx DRP (although no one knows what goes on there or whether it's still active).
 
I'm going ostensively against the grain again here and saying this is an improvement over the previous design, but nowhere near the quality of the extraordinary first one. I found the second one a plain, ungainly blue-glass slab. I favour the contrast to the glass of the white lines and balconies in this last iteration.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top