The Great Canadian Skyline Thread! II - Page 84

FrAnKs · #**1661** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 12:00 AM**

From this angle, it looks like nothing has changed in a while except that shy altitude puping up in the left corner lol

caltrane74 · #**1662** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 1:07 AM**

Instant City! -All built in the last 5 to 6 years

Martin Mtl · #**1663** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 1:41 AM**

The fact it's all generic by-the-numbres architecture explains a lot. Building a lot of crap gives you the illusion you're getting a great skyline, but it's mediocre at best.

caltrane74 · #**1664** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 2:00 AM**

L Tower - Generic?/Crap?/Mediocre?
ICE 1 / ICE 2 - Generic ?/ Crap?/ Mediocre?
Delta Hotel - Generic? /Crap?/Mediocre?

They are all going up in that shot. - Not only is each very or spectacularly unique building, but hella tall as well. I'll watch very closely what "crap" you get excited over. I hope not retread Toronto designs, that become avant guard and haute couture the second they are removed from here.

bolognium · #**1665** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 2:29 AM**

and Batman for good measure

davidivivid · #**1666** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 2:34 AM**

Montreal Downtown 4 Oct 2010 par Roberto Rocco, sur Flickr

isaidso · #**1667** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:09 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Martin Mtl

The fact it's all generic by-the-numbres architecture explains a lot. Building a lot of crap gives you the illusion you're getting a great skyline, but it's mediocre at best.

I agree: 90% of it is generic, sterile, unimaginative, and very unremarkable. Telus and PWC are high quality, but about as boring as you can get. Delta and Southcore look to be more of the same. I'm still holding out hope though. The aquarium might add some variety in the built form while ICE I & II promises to be a wonderful development. What this area desperately needs is some texture: NO MORE BLOODY GLASS!!!!!

L Tower is fabulous, but not in this area.

caltrane74 · #**1668** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:12 AM**

L Tower is on the far left of that shot.

L Tower is dead centre in this shot

isaidso · #**1669** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:17 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

L Tower is on the far left of that shot.

I know, but it's not in this neighbourhood. L Tower is beautiful, but that doesn't help Bremner, does it? It's Telus, PWC, Maple Leaf Square I & II, and Infinity I & II that dominate this stretch so far. Besides the MLS podium, all 6 are very forgettable and as 'Martin Mtl' put it: 'generic by-the-numbers architecture'. No tourists are going to travel here to marvel at these structures.... unless they're from some non descript suburban hell hole.

The Empire State Building, Petronas, Lloyds, Pompidou, etc. These are buildings that are a cut above. Nothing on Bremner is even in the same area code architecturally. Quality over quantity, please!

caltrane74 · #**1670** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by isaidso

I know, but it's not in this neighbourhood. L Tower is beautiful, but that doesn't help Bremner, does it?

L Tower is in the shot, quite visible which Martin is berating.

Just incase you missed what he said.

Quote:

The fact it's ALL generic by-the-numbres architecture explains a lot. Building a lot of crap gives you the illusion you're getting a great skyline, but it's mediocre at best.

Clearly mentions the skyline as a whole, which would include L Tower, unless Martin suffers from selective vision. And sees only what he wants to see.

isaidso · #**1671** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:31 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

L Tower is in the shot, quite visible which Martin is berating.

Just incase you missed what he said.

He probably was berating, but this area of our downtown is mediocre. I have no interest in viewing my city in rose coloured glasses. Let's recognize brilliant architecture when we get it, but not delude ourselves into thinking that the pedestrian stuff is something better. These buildings on Bremner are nothing ground breaking. They're filler.

I do like ICE I & II, but the rest on the stretch don't engage me in the slightest. L Tower is amazing, but that's just 1 building. We need another 30-40 buildings that good.

caltrane74 · #**1672** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:37 AM**

Bremner is seeing more skyscraper construction than Toronto put together for 10 Years.

I remember when the thought of some retread 33 floor tower getting built got me to bust out pen and paper.

Writing Novels and Love Letters.

Chadillaccc · #**1673** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:40 AM**

Totally agreed. I actually just did a comparison between Toronto's FCP and 50 Bloor and London's Shard and Pinnacle... it's astonishing to see the architectural merit of the towers in London when compared to our uninspired boxes.

Here's the diagram... quite sad
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55562809

Though, I do love FCP... don't get me wrong.

isaidso · #**1674** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:42 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Bremner is seeing more skyscraper construction than Toronto put together for 10 Years.

I remember when the thought of some retread 33 floor tower getting built got me to bust out pen and paper.

The construction volume is impressive, but when the dust settles we have to live with these buildings for perhaps another 100 years. I'd rather get one quarter the # of buildings, but have each one be a knock out. I don't agree with some that argue that only high end buildings can be beautiful either. Look at City Place. Arguably the best one of the lot is the fixed income building going up south of Parade. Good design doesn't have to cost a lot.

I do think Toronto could do with more height, but even here quality/design must trump height.

caltrane74 · #**1675** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 3:46 AM**

There is nothing wrong with boxes.

When you spice it up with cylinders, diamonds and the Toronto Shard.

Oh you missed it, far left top photo, Second from the left and two towers far right.

kw5150 · #**1676** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 4:07 AM**

This thread is going retarded again. There is lots of uninspired crap in every city.......even new york. Get over yourselves. Montreal sure has its stock of ugly as well. Who gives a shit.

RTA · #**1677** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 4:28 AM**

Edmonton in smoke, photo by me.

MTLskyline · #**1678** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 4:33 AM**

^ Great shot!

Redkey · #**1679** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 4:40 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Totally agreed. I actually just did a comparison between Toronto's FCP and 50 Bloor and London's Shard and Pinnacle... it's astonishing to see the architectural merit of the towers in London when compared to our uninspired boxes.

Here's the diagram... quite sad
http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=55562809

Though, I do love FCP... don't get me wrong.

No offence to Koops or anything but the diagram that is showing 50 Bloor is based on the line drawing and the diagram has not been updated since the real render came out.

Chadillaccc · #**1680** Posted: **Jul 16, 2012, 4:49 AM**

What? A real render has been released?

EDIT: Ohh haha I remember now. Yeah a new drawing should definitely be done, the real rendering looks much better.