Toronto Yonge & Rich Condominiums | 156.35m | 46s | Great Gulf | a—A

No "douchie" marketing campaign is complete without this reoccurring pop-collared render guy.

33Nn2iR.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 33Nn2iR.jpg
    33Nn2iR.jpg
    47.7 KB · Views: 1,068
Haha, but seriously I do feel bad for this guy ^. His girlfriend just broke up with him via a text message in that pic saying she was dating someone who bought in River City ;) Plus, a car almost hit him. All and all an awful day.
 
If I'm honest, I'm not loving it. It's busy and unresolved. Either of the two ideas would be quite svelte on its own but it just seems oddly gratuitous to combine them into one structure.

I'll have to sleep on it.
 
ProjectEnd said:
If I'm honest, I'm not loving it. It's busy and unresolved. Either of the two ideas would be quite svelte on its own but it just seems oddly gratuitous to combine them into one structure.

I'll have to sleep on it.
Click to expand...

Exactly my feelings on this one. There are some great ideas at work but the randomized pattern on the tower somehow seems lazy (when usually aA does such an interesting take on 'randomized' motifs) and all put together it seems like a bit of a hodgepodge.

Above all I struggle with the inclusion of the shuffled balconies of the shorter tower (a la One Thousand Bay) in the same design as the taller portion. Just way too much going on here for my taste, given that the various motifs don't complement each other but compete.
 
The video renderings are quite striking, but the marketing piece itself is so overdone. Does drivel like this really sell condos? "Yonge at Heart" and "Rich in Possibilities"...oh brother.
 
Last edited:
AlbertC said:
No "douchie" marketing campaign is complete without this reoccurring pop-collared render guy.

View attachment 10422
Click to expand...

TOCondoGarden said:
Haha, but seriously I do feel bad for this guy ^. His girlfriend just broke up with him via a text message in that pic saying she was dating someone who bought in River City ;) Plus, a car almost hit him. All and all an awful day.
Click to expand...

Look at the picture closely. It is actually a future rendering of Roberto Luongo getting the text saying he has been traded.
 
From the panel's report:

Members noted that one of the objectives of the Downtown Tall Building Study is to develop buildings in a manner which sensitively fits into their context and makes a positive contribution to the streets and public realm surrounding them. They felt that while the proposal contained some positive public realm components (heritage restoration, through block connections), that on the balance, it was not making a positive impact. The proposal was described variously as being overly bulky, massive, containing too much density and massing, being too compromised, and "over the top".

Members expressed strong support for the Downtown height vision which was recently endorsed by City Council, and suggested that this proposal should comply with it. They were cognizant that a 50* storey tower in this location would set a precedent for others to follow, and felt that the proposed height – being nearly twice as high as the Downtown vision – was not suitable or appropriate. One Member also noted that the proposed height was similar to the first project reviewed during this session (58 storeys at Yonge and Eglinton), and that this project was in a location where these heights were much more appropriate (the intersection of higher-order transit).
Click to expand...

That 50 storeys is considered too tall in what is essentially the downtown core is absurd to me. The Downtown Tall Building Study is already outdated.
 
Ramako said:
From the panel's report:



That 50 storeys is considered too tall in what is essentially the downtown core is absurd to me. The Downtown Tall Building Study is already outdated.
Click to expand...

Meanwhile crappy 501 Yonge got unanimous support from the DRP at 52 stories?!?!? This building is closer to the financial district than 501.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top