[interchange42]

It’s because it’s designed by a non-Toronto architectural firm. For whatever reason, international firms have contributed by far the best designs, both residential and commercial, in this city for the last 20 years.

The very reason that a developer goes after a foreign architect is a signal that they are willing to spend more on building X, and not just in fees, but in materials too. They are also paying for the cachet associated with that architect, with an eye to attracting, they hope, well-moneyed purchasers, typically end-users, not investors who want to rent the suites out, and they charge much more to cover that.

Developers do not go after just any old architect from whichever city, they're always getting the most renowned ones. Remember that Chicago, home of Studio Gang, while admittedly having lots of great architecture, is also chock-a-block with run-of-the-mill buildings too, by architects you've never heard of, and for good reason. Same goes for just about any city that we've borrowed a starchitect from ...although I have a feeling that there's nothing bad in Copenhagen, somehow.

Oh yeah I definitely know how much more expensive It is to build like this building probably cost 40% more than it would if they had of just done a four corner tower but to everyone looking at it worth it Just hoping the layouts aren't absolutely terrible at the top because in order to move from the square to the cylinder they would be losing floor space on the upper levels

There are far fewer suites on the upper floors, so they are in fact larger.

42

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

...although I have a feeling that there's nothing bad in Copenhagen, somehow.

I wonder if that's a cultural thing that promotes higher standards in architecture and development. Or a rule of law thing that forbids firms and developers from turning out shite. Or both!