Toronto Panorama at Concord CityPlace | 96.01m | 28s | Concord Adex | BDP Quadrangle

Re: Panorama

Your response on what is the best was predictable. I knew you would come back at me with this paragraph: "Is it architecture? Is it most profitable? ...."

If we compare CityPlace condos with the Absolute Towers purely on architectural merits alone, Marilyn and Monroe are simply put--stunning. The Montage isn't bad but it just can't compete with Absolute on those grounds (Of course, we don't know what it will look like when it's finished, but let's assume the best).

Which leads me to my next question: to what degree then, would the folks at Concorde care that the best in architecture is going up in Missisauga and not in CityPlace, if they care at all?

...If there were three Absolute Towers in the plans, I wonder what they'd have called it then. Maybe, the Anna the Nicole and Smith. :p
 
Re: Panorama

to what degree then, would the folks at Concorde care that the best in architecture is going up in Missisauga and not in CityPlace, if they care at all?
Click to expand...

I don't think the Concord people really care if their buildings have the best design, or whether their buildings are going to look better than any other building in the GTA.

In Cityplace, Concord is trying to replicate their successful development of Concord Pacific Place in Vancouver. I haven't seen Concord Pacific Place, but I'm pretty sure that they brought a formula similar to Vancouver over here to Toronto... blue-green glass towers plus some townhouses built in an urban context with what the developers think is good urban design, with a big "urban" park right in the middle of the neighbourhood. It worked in Vancouver, and it (arguably) seems to work just as well here in Toronto, so why mend something that isn't broken?

Also note that Absolute took a sort of gamble by calling a design competition for their signature tower. Most of the entries that they received came from small architectural firms or architects from Latin America, Asia or Eastern Europe, and even architecture students. Most of them have little or no experience designing and managing skyscraper projects in a context like the GTA. Concord took a less risky course by finding architects like KPMB and Page + Steele to design their towers- while these firms won't give you a landmark building every time, you know that these firms can provide you with a decent product, plus they have the experience and the know-how in how to build a tall building in the Toronto area.
 
"the best in architecture is going up in Missisauga"

They should be really nice, yes, but let's wait till they're built, please...remember we only have the renderings so far - they might end up looking like Marilyn Manson.
 
Re: Panorama

...If there were three Absolute Towers in the plans, I wonder what they'd have called it then. Maybe, the Anna the Nicole and Smith.
Click to expand...
carrienations.jpg
 
In Cityplace, Concord is trying to replicate their successful development of Concord Pacific Place in Vancouver. I haven't seen Concord Pacific Place, but I'm pretty sure that they brought a formula similar to Vancouver over here to Toronto... blue-green glass towers plus some townhouses built in an urban context with what the developers think is good urban design, with a big "urban" park right in the middle of the neighbourhood. It worked in Vancouver, and it (arguably) seems to work just as well here in Toronto, so why mend something that isn't broken?
Click to expand...

Actually, they didn't work that well - which is why they totally redid the plan for the west side.
 
Largely because the building sites to the east of Spadina don't have much continuity with each other and in the middle of it all is Optima with probably the worst street presence of the bunch.
 
Even the buildings on Front are pretty bad...the retail is totally undermined by those hideous green swooshy awnings.
 
i am not too crazy about absolute world,especially if the developer cheaps out on glass and cladding.it is not a easy building to build.
 
I like the rough drawing of it. I read in another forum that it might be the top levels of the Signature tower, which could make sense...
 
For me Absolute holds nothing on city place. What’s the number one most important thing when talking about real-estate? Location, location, location. I’d much rather wake up each day and view out over the lake or city rather then a mall or suburban wasteland. Also to me absolute chose one of my least favorite and simple designs and like stated above it’s surrounded by ugly buildings.
 
I hate it when publications misuse their apostrophes.

Anyways, a three storey rec centre at Panorama probably means that it's a multi-tower project. There's no way that one 25 storey tower could support that big a rec centre, especially when they are luxury suites - i.e. fewer units.
 
The Panorama site is quite small though - there's only space for one point tower as far as I can see, and in regards to a 3 floor rec centre, well, each floor may only have a couple of hundred square feet. The podium for the project won't be so big itself. The site is pretty much triangular, constrained by Lake Shore to the south, the Gardiner to the north, and Loblaws to the west.

42
 
Thanks for the info - expect big condo fees with the luxury tag..
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top