I've been wondering this for quite some time. What is it with the obsession that Toronto has with balconies? I feel they make a building seem temporary looking. not sure why. Just makes them seem almost cheap.
I don't see this going in in Chicago or New York...but maybe I'm just not looking hard enough. Just seems Toronto has more than its fair share.
you know what gives them a cheap look. most of them are same-cheap boxes with cheap green glass. that's why they look cheap and temporary.
I have no problems with balconies, projected, recessed, or other, as long as they are large enough to be useful, and are part of the expression of the tower.
by Yellowfever
Anything other than a monolithic, corporate-looking tower aesthetic may not appeal to many fanboys, but I think it would be great if every condo household had an outdoor "room" in the sky to dine in and enjoy the sunset, in the company and in view of other balcony/terrace dwellers. It's the only way you can convince suburbanites to give up their lawns and backyard patios
I am also puzzled by the aesthetic distaste for balconies. I concede that they don't look good on any and all buildings, but a blanket aversion to them is curious. To each his own, I guess. Buildings like the Casa trio would be just more plain, sterile glass edifices without the horizontal protrusions that give them a bit of visual character and gusto. Casa III:
I am also puzzled by the aesthetic distaste for balconies. I concede that they don't look good on any and all buildings, but a blanket aversion to them is curious. To each his own, I guess. Buildings like the Casa trio would be just more plain, sterile glass edifices without the horizontal protrusions that give them a bit of visual character and gusto. Casa III:
The fact that you had to post an artist's rendering, rather than an actual photo (preferably not gussied up with HDR and other effects) of a good-looking building with balconies kind of makes your argument fall flat on its face.
There are certainly a few buildings that I think look good despite their balconies, like 1 St Thomas (especially) and Shangri La Toronto, but even those would look better without IMHO.
The fact that you had to post an artist's rendering, rather than an actual photo (preferably not gussied up with HDR and other effects) of a good-looking building with balconies kind of makes your argument fall flat on its face.
Is that right? I think not. Casas II and III are under construction and pre-construction respectively, so there is nothing more than an artist's render for either right now.
Here's a shot of Casa the 1st by AlbertC at UT. I think it looks quite respectable, certainly better than it would look without them. I don't want to clog the thread with off-topic photos, so I'll spoilerize it.
Is that right? I think not. Casas II and III are under construction and pre-construction respectively, so there is nothing more than an artist's render for either right now.
Here's a shot of Casa the 1st by AlbertC at UT. I think it looks quite respectable, certainly better than it would look without them. I don't want to clog the thread with off-topic photos, so I'll spoilerize it.
Balconies add depth and character to a building. It is great to look up and see people, not just glass.
__________________
"The destructive effects of automobiles are much less a cause than a symptom of our incompetence at city building" - Jane Jacobs 1961ish
I love the Casa designs , they are boxy yes but at least different looking from most other towers and certainly stand out.
They won't even be unique on their block. CASA I & II will be within a stone's throw of this 3rd incarnation of the same design.
__________________
ELBOWS UP CANADA, ELBOWS UP UKRAINE, ELBOWS UP GREENLAND
CANADA, EUROPE, NZ, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, MEXICO STRONG
US REPUBLICANS/MAGA/ICE NOT WELCOME HERE, STAY OUT
^But it will be a step up design which is neat. The first building being 450ft, the second being over 600ft, and the last of the trio coming in at 665ft. I do realize this project is a love/hate design. I happen to think it's pretty cool. Technically the developer could have been more creative and did 3 separate buildings, each unique in their own right, but they took a winning formula and ran with it. Can't say I blame them, as each tower sells out.
I liked the first one, grudgingly accepted a 2nd, but this has killed it for me completely.
__________________
ELBOWS UP CANADA, ELBOWS UP UKRAINE, ELBOWS UP GREENLAND
CANADA, EUROPE, NZ, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, MEXICO STRONG
US REPUBLICANS/MAGA/ICE NOT WELCOME HERE, STAY OUT
I've always thought Casa looks rather bland & fat(I know its not really a wide tower, it just appears as such).
I'm actually more hopefully for the 2nd & 3rd ones. At least they'll really soar with their thinner portions and greater height so as to distract me from the blandness of its windowall facade.
I've always thought Casa looks rather bland & fat(I know its not really a wide tower, it just appears as such).
I'm actually more hopefully for the 2nd & 3rd ones. At least they'll really soar with their thinner portions and greater height so as to distract me from the blandness of its windowall facade.
At street level CASA I is well executed. The tower was always going to be a sleeper. The 3rd incarnation may be the best of the 3 due to its height, but I'd still rather have just one of these.
__________________
ELBOWS UP CANADA, ELBOWS UP UKRAINE, ELBOWS UP GREENLAND
CANADA, EUROPE, NZ, AUSTRALIA, JAPAN, MEXICO STRONG
US REPUBLICANS/MAGA/ICE NOT WELCOME HERE, STAY OUT
Prev
Linear Mode
