Oxford Tower

[Spring2008]

https://www.flickr.com/people/75646235@N06/

[Spring2008]

How about a hotel atop, bring this to 300m

[elconsulto]

If it's going to be a glorified box, i say make it taller

[Spring2008]

Crown should be a lot more distinct too, atrium more of a regional draw instead of what looks to be tenant specific amenities.

[ByeByeBaby]

sadtrombone.com

[Spring2008]

This design will be reviewed, how about we focus on ideas to improve/inspirations. Lots of people in the know on this forum.

[Tills13]

Good height for that area. Is this the IOL site?

Honestly, I really like it. I think they could do more (I think we all love crown lighting elements, here, and it could work on this tower), but good none-the-less.

[Calgarian]

Looks like a stretched version of City Centre. It's a decent design, but definitely not fitting for such a prominent site.

[Spring2008]

Originally Posted by Tills13

Good height for that area. Is this the IOL site?

Honestly, I really like it. I think they could do more (I think we all love crown lighting elements, here, and it could work on this tower), but good none-the-less.

Ya

I actually like the massing, just think they'll need to make a few tweaks to the design to make it more elegant, similar to BP.

Wouldn't mind some mixed-use/height bump either.

[Tills13]

Originally Posted by Spring2008

Ya

I actually like the massing, just think they'll need to make a few tweaks to the design to make it more elegant, similar to BP.

Wouldn't mind some mixed-use/height bump either.

I recall people talking about another site around that area with similar prestige and with another mystery project in the works (not Gateway), am I just remembering wrong?

Also, yeah... where are these coming from/when were they taken? Oxford's site mentions nothing about this.

[bt04ku]

Quite the let down. Not an awful design, or even a bad one really, but not a good one and definitely not what the site deserved.

[s211]

Something about the second render seems off in terms of scale. The proposal seems to dwarf Canterra Tower, or whatever it's called now, which I seem to recall being roughly 45-46 storeys. Artistic licence?

[Tills13]

Originally Posted by s211

Something about the second render seems off in terms of scale. The proposal seems to dwarf Canterra Tower, or whatever it's called now, which I seem to recall being roughly 45-46 storeys. Artistic licence?

yeah and Jameson and Centennial, too, which aren't exactly "short"

[Ominus]

Things I like:

- The glass looks to be fairly clear and see-thru
- While I find its placement on the site a little strange it works to its advantage as it wont block all of the sun from hitting 5th ave. It almost looks to me like they are planning ahead for the potential to own the entire block with the podium design.

Things I don't like:

- Not as tall as I had hoped but its not bad.
- It could go from meh to amazing if it has some awesome light feature.

To me it looks like a good jumping off point, I would like to see what refinements are made and if they are eventually planning to have the whole block, If they do they could try to build its mirror image on the west side of the site and maybe a skywalk between them.

[WaitWhat?]

Originally Posted by s211

Something about the second render seems off in terms of scale. The proposal seems to dwarf Canterra Tower, or whatever it's called now, which I seem to recall being roughly 45-46 storeys. Artistic licence?

Yeah it really doesn't seem right. Centennial Place East in the background has 40 floors.

[O-tacular]

Hazzah!!! That's how you start a work week!!!!

This is actually much better than I was expecting, though my prediction of it being a new City Centre type tower came true. I actually like this one more though. I like the step up as opposed to a spire and it will certainly add variety to the skyline which is sorely lacking with all the flat topped towers.

The benefit of expecting crap paid off as I am pleasantly surprised. Not earth shattering design, but this will definitely make a better tallest than BP.

[tomthumb2]

What makes anyone think they'll improve on this design? Is it not final?

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by Ominus

Things I like:

- The glass looks to be fairly clear and see-thru
- While I find its placement on the site a little strange it works to its advantage as it wont block all of the sun from hitting 5th ave. It almost looks to me like they are planning ahead for the potential to own the entire block with the podium design.

Things I don't like:

- Not as tall as I had hoped but its not bad.
- It could go from meh to amazing if it has some awesome light feature.

To me it looks like a good jumping off point, I would like to see what refinements are made and if they are eventually planning to have the whole block, If they do they could try to build its mirror image on the west side of the site and maybe a skywalk between them.

Apparently they do own the whole block and SB said it was only one tower. Interesting that the rendering shows the other towers still there. I hope they don't build a twin down the road. This city has enough of those already.

[CorporateWhore]

Originally Posted by Ominus

Things I like:
- The glass looks to be fairly clear and see-thru

Glass in reality is never as see-through as in the rendering. Renderings in general should never be used to gauge details like glass transparency...or material color...or landscaping...or lighting...or...neighborhood atmosphere...or age/hotness of workers/residents. So pretty much anything beyond general shapes, ha. They are marketing material akin to a nicely stylized hamburger in a TV commercial.

Considering the architect though, the glass of EAP is probably what'd you'd end up with.

[O-tacular]

I voted like it not love it or list it because the shape has potential. If the height is only like 3 meters taller than Brookfield Place I will be hella disappointed though. This site at the very least deserves a new tallest by a fair margin.