Comments on: 40_R Laneway House / superkül inc

By: ADS

ADS — Tue, 18 Aug 2009 12:12:56 +0000

i like that the materials are cheap. thin-gage steel is way cheaper than corten and you get that patina. it’s pretty good and original.

By: Kick Him, Honey » Blog Archive » No. 40R Laneway house

Kick Him, Honey » Blog Archive » No. 40R Laneway house — Wed, 20 May 2009 16:51:03 +0000

[...] From arch daily. [...]

By: links for 2009-05-16 « thedysh

links for 2009-05-16 « thedysh — Sat, 16 May 2009 12:03:32 +0000

[...] 40_R Laneway House / superkül inc | ArchDaily (tags: toronto architecture house design) [...]

By: Greg

Greg — Fri, 15 May 2009 15:03:20 +0000

@Jason

Relax, my initial comment was more directed at “Ultraman” anyways, and his dismissal of architects. I appreciate your appreciation of the project.

By: JasonW

JasonW — Fri, 15 May 2009 09:33:58 +0000

@bc

No, it doesn’t have to be something ‘new’ to be a good project! and this is a ‘good’ and clever project. I just happen to like seeing people taking risks.. and this is playing it safe!

And there’s nothing wrong with it… I just don’t get all the hate towards my ‘nothing new’ comment…

By: INawe

INawe — Fri, 15 May 2009 05:35:26 +0000

@Bo Lucky

I think it was just said because the reincarnations of the building dictated how the facade of the building came about and so it doesn’t seem like and arbitrary decision. i’m pretty sure it also leads to how there must have been some code interpretation and grandfathering in of property lines involved as well.

all in all, i’d say its a nice story which ends with a well done outcome.

By: bc

bc — Thu, 14 May 2009 22:07:09 +0000

it doesn’t have to be something ‘new’, it ‘can’ just be a ‘good’ and clever project

By: Ben lepley

Ben lepley — Thu, 14 May 2009 17:45:05 +0000

This project could have easily turned out to be a cluttered mess, but it didn’t, the architects kept it clean, simple, and elegant. I am suspicious of the facade though, It clearly looks that 90% of the rusted panels are new, and the other 10% is reused. I quite love the idea though. Reminds me a bit of some Bow Wow projects. good job guys

By: JasonW

JasonW — Thu, 14 May 2009 17:41:41 +0000

@Greg

“learn how to apprecaite a well executed project, architecture isn’t fashion.”
Did I say this was a bad project? or did you miss the “Smart & Nice” part?

“These “nothing new” comments are just absurd…”
Say what you want but the bottom line is: This project brings nothing new to architecture!

Once again:
Smart & Nice (& well executed).
But (still) nothing new.

By: Bo Lucky

Bo Lucky — Thu, 14 May 2009 17:26:33 +0000

I fully agree – it’s “superkul”.
Since a building history, which started in 1880s, is included in the architect project description, assumtion can safely be made that it was (not anymore – I guess) of some (cultural/historic) importance. If the old building was insignificant and wasn’t that worth keeping, why even bother to relate to it?