mcbg1 said:
What's the point of the eastern promenade when it'll just lead to years of construction at Parliament slip and beyond?
Click to expand...
Lot's of reasons,

1. It's a part of the development and site plan approval so developer has to finish the project to get deposits and LCs back,
2. Deferring it now will only make it more expensive to finish later,
3.The condo owners on the east side of the building would rather look at and be able to use a finished promenade,
4. It connects to the north side of the development which in turn leads to QQE, providing connectivity
 
mcbg1 said:
What's the point of the eastern promenade when it'll just lead to years of construction at Parliament slip and beyond?
Click to expand...
If you take that attitude you would never do any final work anywhere. Why pave this street because the utilities will soon need to dig it up? Why plant this tree because sooner or later there will be a disease that will kill all the trees etc etc.
 
Taken 6 Aug. The rec centre is hoping to open by the end of August and the promenades are likely to be accessible then but no firm date.

IMG_2722.jpeg

IMG_2723.jpeg
IMG_2725.jpeg
IMG_2727.jpeg
IMG_2724.jpeg
IMG_2731.jpeg
 
TheSix said:
And that sign is UGLY. Leave it to Toronto to ruining of the few nice buildings we have. It's a shame the developer didn't have more restrictions for the signage strategy.

It's honestly the worse thing I've seen in awhile.
Click to expand...
What sign are we not liking? Got a pic?
 
It's not so much this sign specifically, rather that the city has very terrible / dated branding and design guidelines for its visual identity - this is apparent across any city produced visual communications from park / building signs to PSA's and other collateral.

Unlikely to change though because a visual identity update would be seen as frivolous and a waste of funds in conservative Toronto, even though it's a massive part of how citizens and visitors interact with the city.
 
Raptor red would have looked better than Maple Leaf blue here...
 
DavidCapizzano said:
It's not so much this sign specifically, rather that the city has very terrible / dated branding and design guidelines for its visual identity - this is apparent across any city produced visual communications from park / building signs to PSA's and other collateral.

Unlikely to change though because a visual identity update would be seen as frivolous and a waste of funds in conservative Toronto, even though it's a massive part of how citizens and visitors interact with the city.
Click to expand...
I guess you could overstate the importance of visual identity, but it's not a coincidence that cities with nicer parks and streets than us have nicer symbols and signs than we do. An indicator of a broader design culture that leads to better outcomes in what gets built in a city? Yes. But if residents can take greater pride in their city, they'll also take better care of it

The Toronto font looks like it belongs to a sewage treatment company - and we have a citizenry that respect it about that much
 
LUVIT! said:
I'm with you INH. The sign is clear, legible, to the point. Is it a Picasso? No.
Click to expand...
I expected more for a building like this. It's these details that takes a "legendary" build to a "great" built. They didn't need a revamped design system to do better.

Disappointing. I bet you won't see this at King Toronto.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top