HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #10321  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 9:25 AM
suburbanite's Avatar
suburbanite suburbanite is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,080
You mean like a 325m Gehry tower?
__________________
Discontented suburbanite since 1994
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10322  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 1:02 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,464
The city provided an exception for Gehry, but trust me, they are still trying to enforce 157m for everyone else. They have increased it to more around 190m if you are east of Duncan by the looks of it though.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10323  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 2:27 PM
esquire's Avatar
esquire esquire is offline
Think about Winnipeg.
 
Join Date: Oct 2001
Posts: 21,660
Quote:
Originally Posted by travis3000 View Post
Most people in here are unimpressed about every building so Im not surprised. I personally think its really striking, I love the glass, it may be a tad bulky if I was to criticize something but I think once built it will be gorgeous. But then again what do I know? Im just a fan boy
I agree, I think it's very nice and people are being too quick to write it off. It brings in some fresh angles and makes a pretty clear design break from the 20th century-era Financial District towers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10324  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 3:48 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,608
I agree with you and the others who also like it. If it actually ever gets built I think it will be a classy addition to the core. I only wish it was maybe 30m taller so it's spire would surpass that mess on FCP for height.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10325  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 3:55 PM
uzi's Avatar
uzi uzi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
The city provided an exception for Gehry, but trust me, they are still trying to enforce 157m for everyone else. They have increased it to more around 190m if you are east of Duncan by the looks of it though.
im talking about projects like Nobu, imagine if it was approved at original 'O' proposal at 175m. but they reduced it to 157m. that 'O' became a U. I still love it but original proposal would have been nicer.
__________________
RESPECT FOR EVERYONE
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10326  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 4:09 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,608
Height should be awarded to developers that want to build high quality towers with strong designs that interact well with their surroundings and at street level.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10327  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 5:16 PM
uzi's Avatar
uzi uzi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,235
agree.
__________________
RESPECT FOR EVERYONE
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10328  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 6:23 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 16,705
We should include bonusing for exceptional design however, I totally disagree that a developer should be allowed to build as tall as they want and throw out all the planning fundamentals that create enjoyable dense urban neighbourhoods.

The Entertainment District plan is actually cone shaped. The 157 metre plateau (which I'm indifferent to) is a product of the OMB, council's unwillingness to forgo section 37 funds to fight appeals and developers being fully versed in the process. This is from memory but, Nobu ended up approved much taller than the ED plan. All versions of Nobu expressed more trendy wow factor than being really good, IMO. I wouldn't give it bonusing for the design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10329  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 6:39 PM
Lugnut Lugnut is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jun 2011
Posts: 132
Quote:
Originally Posted by ssiguy View Post
Nothing special about this building. Not ugly but just looks like another generic blue glass building.
I agree for the most part, although the atrium is nice
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10330  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 7:46 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper View Post
We should include bonusing for exceptional design however, I totally disagree that a developer should be allowed to build as tall as they want and throw out all the planning fundamentals that create enjoyable dense urban neighbourhoods.

The Entertainment District plan is actually cone shaped. The 157 metre plateau (which I'm indifferent to) is a product of the OMB, council's unwillingness to forgo section 37 funds to fight appeals and developers being fully versed in the process. This is from memory but, Nobu ended up approved much taller than the ED plan. All versions of Nobu expressed more trendy wow factor than being really good, IMO. I wouldn't give it bonusing for the design.

Not as tall as they want but certain height limits should be sanctioned based on quality of design. Kind of like in Mirvishe's case.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10331  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 7:46 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 5,608
Quote:
Originally Posted by Lugnut View Post
I agree for the most part, although the atrium is nice

It's funny, the atrium is what seems to irk the most people, especially over on urbantoronto.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10332  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 9:23 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 16,705
I find the design of the atrium overwrought but, what bugs me the most is the prime frontage it occupies for a glorified, climate controlled grand entrance.. it's justified to say the existing buildings as part of this grand modernist vision and to be sacrificed interact poorly with the street. The very least we should hope from this density grabber is a stronger street precense. I say density grabber as the addition over the Hotel Victoria is just that. There is no thought to it at all. The tower has at least some merit. It will be an unfortunate loss if built at this location.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10333  
Old Posted Jan 18, 2019, 10:38 PM
Gresto's Avatar
Gresto Gresto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,409
First page needs an update.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10334  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 2:22 AM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 8,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere View Post
The city provided an exception for Gehry, but trust me, they are still trying to enforce 157m for everyone else. They have increased it to more around 190m if you are east of Duncan by the looks of it though.
Is the 157m restriction part of their policy of having buildings stagger downwards in height towards Spadina? I'm assuming it's not an infrastructure issue as sewers, power lines, etc. can always be upgraded to meet demands placed on it.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10335  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 2:27 AM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 8,929
Quote:
Originally Posted by TorontoDrew View Post
It's the Commerce Court 3 proposal.

source: http://urbantoronto.ca


source: https://www.claudecormier.com
Love love love the proportions. The girth gives it more presence than any other building in the city. If it ends up looking like that it will become my favourite Toronto skyscraper after TD Centre.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10336  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 3:37 AM
Nouvellecosse's Avatar
Nouvellecosse Nouvellecosse is offline
As seen on SSC ;)
 
Join Date: Aug 2005
Location: Nova Scotia
Posts: 5,586
I think they should add another 50-75m in roof height and make it the city's first true office supertall. And instead of the proposed Commerce Court location, it should replace the Exchange Tower's underwhelming podium at Adelaide and York!
__________________
"The reasonable man adapts himself to the world; the unreasonable one persists in trying to adapt the world to himself. Therefore all progress depends on the unreasonable man." - George Bernard Shaw
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10337  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 5:50 AM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 33,917
Quote:
Originally Posted by uzi View Post
man they really need to scrap that 157m rule in the entertainment district. I mean you look at TO skyline from the lake there all these tall buildings on the right side of CN tower and then theres bunch of highrises on the left side of CN tower. it looks like the skyline is leaning on one side. im not saying build supertalls in entertainment district but they atleast increase the height from 157m to maybe like 190m+. look at the pic and you might get the idea of what im saying. imagine a balanced skyline with CN in the middle.
[IMG]Toronto Skyline by Markus Hill, on Flickr[/IMG]
The Entertainment District is set far back from the lake and even 200 meter towers wouldn't make a really big difference. Those buildings would need to be built right up on the lakeshore to balance out the skyline and that is not gonna happen as it is already a built up area.
__________________
Bangkok-Pattaya 2019
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10338  
Old Posted Jan 19, 2019, 5:56 AM
uzi's Avatar
uzi uzi is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2013
Location: Ontario
Posts: 1,235
Quote:
Originally Posted by isaidso View Post
Love love love the proportions. The girth gives it more presence than any other building in the city. If it ends up looking like that it will become my favourite Toronto skyscraper after Scotia Plaza.
fixed it for ya.
__________________
RESPECT FOR EVERYONE
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10339  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2019, 7:11 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 8,929
Scotia Plaza gets bumped to 3rd.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Nouvellecosse View Post
I think they should add another 50-75m in roof height and make it the city's first true office supertall.
As long as they increase the floor plate to maintain the proportions.
__________________
World's First Documented Baseball Game: Beachville, Ontario, June 4th, 1838.
World's First Documented Gridiron Game: University College, Toronto, November 9th, 1861.
Hamilton Tiger-Cats since 1869 & Toronto Argonauts since 1873: North America's 2 oldest pro football teams
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10340  
Old Posted Jan 20, 2019, 7:47 PM
travis3000's Avatar
travis3000 travis3000 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2012
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 2,375
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltrane74 View Post
The Entertainment District is set far back from the lake and even 200 meter towers wouldn't make a really big difference. Those buildings would need to be built right up on the lakeshore to balance out the skyline and that is not gonna happen as it is already a built up area.
Not true, once the Mirvish towers get built....even if its 8-10 years down the road that side will be very well balanced out. Two 1000ft towers! Double the size of anything else thats there. Even if they are set back more, they will still look like the tallest.

PLUS there's also Cityplace twins going up in the next few years, they are both 200m+ which will stand out.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:14 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.