HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForumSkyscraper Posters
     
Welcome to the SkyscraperPage Forum

Since 1999, the SkyscraperPage Forum has been one of the most active skyscraper enthusiast communities on the web. The global membership discusses development news and construction activity on projects from around the world, alongside discussions on urban design, architecture, transportation and many other topics. Welcome!

You are currently browsing as a guest. Register with the SkyscraperPage Forum and join this growing community of skyscraper enthusiasts. Registering has benefits such as fewer ads, the ability to post messages, private messaging and more.

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise Construction

    

Bay-Adelaide East in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Toronto Skyscraper Diagram
Toronto Forum   • Toronto Projects & Construction Forum
            
View Full Map

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #1  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 5:28 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
Stuffum'n'Cuffum
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,442
Red face TORONTO | Bay-Adelaide Centre East Tower | 43 Floors | 196 Meters

Description
Adjacent to Brookfield’s new 51-storey office development (Bay Adelaide West) in the Financial Core, Bay Adelaide East is a 43-storey, 900,000- square-foot office tower planned for the second phase of the Bay Adelaide Centre project. The tower is designed to achieve LEED Gold certification and will feature state-of-the-art operating and life safety systems. Connected to Toronto’s PATH system, the tower will have direct access to the 27 kilometer below grade public walkway and retail network.

Bay Adelaide North is the third phase of the Bay Adelaide Centre project and could accommodate a new development of up to 500,000 square feet.



Brookfield Properties operates its buildings at the highest standard. Our on-site property, facility management, security and fire-safety teams are in place to oversee and keep the properties efficiently operating. In addition to the core services found in all of the buildings, amenities specific to 2 Adelaide Street West include:

Building size (000’s Sq. Ft.): Office: 20; Retail: 8
Year Built: Approx. 1930s (8-14 Adelaide St. W) and mid 1900s (2-6 Adelaide St. W & 118 Yonge St.)
Year Renovated: 1986
Number of floors: 4
Typical floor size: 7,500 SF

Amenities

•Underground parking for 1100 vehicles (currently 860 stalls available due to construction)
•Proximate to major hotels, restaurants and shops including the 3.5 -million-square-foot Toronto Eaton Centre as well as The Bay department store
•Located in the Central Business District near public parks and transportation
•Situated equidistant from both the Queen and King Street Subway stations (Yonge-University Line) and a short walk south to Union Station






http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2...file-38680.pdf
__________________
Learn Here about the 187 Tallest Buildings U/C in Toronto The Toronto Skyscraper Blog
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #2  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 9:24 PM
yaletown_fella's Avatar
yaletown_fella yaletown_fella is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,784
DP my bad..
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #3  
Old Posted Jun 11, 2011, 9:25 PM
yaletown_fella's Avatar
yaletown_fella yaletown_fella is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,784
Like lots of T.O forumers I'm scared shitless that the design will look like the B/A phase one
I didnt actually mind the circa 1990 Bay Adelaide design!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #4  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 3:34 AM
Gresto's Avatar
Gresto Gresto is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,436
I actually find B-A 1 has an austere affability to it. It's no great shakes, but I don't mind it at all and hope they stick to the same design for the other two, just for continuity's sake.
The 1991 B-A design was Atlantaesque pomo, but it was 280 or so meters.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #5  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 6:11 AM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 6,387
I don't mind BA I either, but another one is just going to put me off the deep end. Something beautiful instead of numbingly practical please.
__________________
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
     
     
  #6  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 12:57 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
Stuffum'n'Cuffum
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,442
Don't get your hopes up. A practical design will lease far faster.
__________________
Learn Here about the 187 Tallest Buildings U/C in Toronto The Toronto Skyscraper Blog
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #7  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 2:29 PM
Travis007's Avatar
Travis007 Travis007 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,201
Realistically, I'd expect another no frills design for the second phase. Although, I'd much prefer some design/form variance. My favourite ever proposal for BA centre was this 80 (or 90's?) design. I'm usually not too fond of pomo architecture but (IMO) it's a shame BAC wasn't built in this form. The building we have today is decent, but it would be nice to have some variance in the skyline. It reminds me of One Liberty Place in Philadelphia, which I quite like.

__________________
Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #8  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 5:52 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
Stuffum'n'Cuffum
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,442
I'm not a fan of Atlanta style POMO but the Toronto skyline is getting so huge we can accommodate a few more of these beasts along with BCE Place and Trump without too much damage to the aesthetics of the skyline.
__________________
Learn Here about the 187 Tallest Buildings U/C in Toronto The Toronto Skyscraper Blog
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #9  
Old Posted Jun 12, 2011, 6:26 PM
steveve's Avatar
steveve steveve is offline
SSP Legend
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by Travis007 View Post
Realistically, I'd expect another no frills design for the second phase. Although, I'd much prefer some design/form variance. My favourite ever proposal for BA centre was this 80 (or 90's?) design. I'm usually not too fond of pomo architecture but (IMO) it's a shame BAC wasn't built in this form. The building we have today is decent, but it would be nice to have some variance in the skyline. It reminds me of One Liberty Place in Philadelphia, which I quite like.

something like that would be more suited for the Canada/Sapphire tower lot. I always found that design wouldn't fit in/look good where the Bay Adelaide Centre was.

as for BA2, maybe if they tried something different, it would clash with the other tower, but as for BA north, i don't see anything stopping them for a redesign.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #10  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2011, 7:03 PM
yaletown_fella's Avatar
yaletown_fella yaletown_fella is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,784
There's no hope for BA North so I'd rather the east tower gets a legit design. It's going to be stubby (like 150m) thanks to the stubborn nimbys at city hall (those that are left)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #11  
Old Posted Jun 14, 2011, 7:19 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
Stuffum'n'Cuffum
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 28,442
I think it's already approved at 196 meters. so no worries.
__________________
Learn Here about the 187 Tallest Buildings U/C in Toronto The Toronto Skyscraper Blog
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #12  
Old Posted Jun 15, 2011, 5:20 PM
yaletown_fella's Avatar
yaletown_fella yaletown_fella is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,784
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltrane74 View Post
I think it's already approved at 196 meters. so no worries.
I know the east tower will probably end up 196m. but the north towers the same height eh? I thought the north proposal had shadowing issues (pretty close to the Canada Tower site, go figure)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #13  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2011, 6:20 PM
vegeta_skyline's Avatar
vegeta_skyline vegeta_skyline is offline
Registered User, Maybe
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,161
That should of been The Bay Adelaide Center, not what we got. Would it have killed us to have one more Pomo tower? I say hell no! Not when we've got dozens of glass boxes with the same proportions going up. Of course it was economics that killed the original tower not the design or height.

This beast would of been 945ft/288m (including spire, the top of the roof looked to be in the upper 800's ref; http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=1494). Also with Bay Adelaide East coming in the near future that would of giving us basically the exact same glass box we got instead. (only 79ft shorter)

Observe;


Devolution is a more fitting description. I would of taken the 3rd version as well over what we got especially considering theres going to be at least one more building exactly like it. Not only are we building boring boxes like crazy in Toronto, every new complex has twins! As if one wasn't bad enough. RIP original Bay-Adelaide Centre and know that you are dearly missed.
__________________
EM71 = MVP

Last edited by vegeta_skyline; Jun 18, 2011 at 6:49 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #14  
Old Posted Jun 18, 2011, 11:12 PM
Dylan Leblanc's Avatar
Dylan Leblanc Dylan Leblanc is online now
Website Manager
 
Join Date: Jun 2000
Location: Victoria Canada
Posts: 7,896
Well put.

TO continues the dull corporate architecture with the recently proposed Waterpark Place 3.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #15  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2011, 2:30 AM
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
Master of the Universe
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Secret
Posts: 8,889
I'm a firm believer that it would of killed us if the PoMo Bay Adelaide design was built although I would give version three the worst rating. The version that was built is the best of them all. Waterpark 3 needs tons of work but those suggesting keeping the theme of the original twins should face a firing squad. I've yet to see a successful updated version of 1980s PoMo and why oh why would anyone want a twin tower complex to become a three tower complex. Keep it simple and modern with top quality curtain wall that adds depth to the design. Consult Germany.
__________________
Excavation/shoring of a multi-level pit is stage of construction. No one in their right mind would pay all this money if the plan wasn't to fill it immediately.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #16  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2011, 3:06 AM
vegeta_skyline's Avatar
vegeta_skyline vegeta_skyline is offline
Registered User, Maybe
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,161
The originals not as bad as Trump and I don't see anyone committing suicide over that thing. A high quality curtain wall, while always appreciated is not enough to save the most boring design in the universe
__________________
EM71 = MVP
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #17  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2011, 7:48 AM
Phil McAvity's Avatar
Phil McAvity Phil McAvity is offline
I put the F-U in FUN
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,877
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline View Post
....not as bad as Trump....
Are you high?

In a city like Toronto, with it's thoroughly insipid architecture, Trump stands out like a ground-breaking architectural icon! Even if you don't like it, you can't say it's a boring box like almost all the other office towers downtown.

Toronto's skyscrapers are a barren wasteland of architectural creativity.
__________________
"Guys ain't dumb"-Money for Nothing by Dire Straits.

Last edited by Phil McAvity; Jun 19, 2011 at 9:40 AM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #18  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2011, 3:20 PM
Dale Dale is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Orlando
Posts: 3,264
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Are you high?

In a city like Toronto, with it's thoroughly insipid architecture, Trump stands out like a ground-breaking architectural icon! Even if you don't like it, you can't say it's a boring box like almost all the other office towers downtown.

Toronto's skyscrapers are a barren wasteland of architectural creativity.
Well, that's been Toronto's reputation for decades. But it seems like the more Toronto breaks out of the box, so to speak, the more Torontonians despair of their city. Personally, I never saw, say, the Liebskind tower coming.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #19  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2011, 3:36 PM
steveve's Avatar
steveve steveve is offline
SSP Legend
 
Join Date: May 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 3,639
Quote:
Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline View Post
That should of been The Bay Adelaide Center, not what we got. Would it have killed us to have one more Pomo tower? I say hell no! Not when we've got dozens of glass boxes with the same proportions going up. Of course it was economics that killed the original tower not the design or height.

This beast would of been 945ft/288m (including spire, the top of the roof looked to be in the upper 800's ref; http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=1494). Also with Bay Adelaide East coming in the near future that would of giving us basically the exact same glass box we got instead. (only 79ft shorter)

Observe;


Devolution is a more fitting description. I would of taken the 3rd version as well over what we got especially considering theres going to be at least one more building exactly like it. Not only are we building boring boxes like crazy in Toronto, every new complex has twins! As if one wasn't bad enough. RIP original Bay-Adelaide Centre and know that you are dearly missed.
nice stuff.... and yeah, proposal 3 wouldn't have been so bad, and 2 either (though the 2 design looks a bit more dated)... actually, the 3 design reminded me of aura for a split second... nonetheless, BA1 isn't all that horrible, but seeing 2 more of them will get old very fast. BA 1 fits perfectly on the skyline though both in height and design.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #20  
Old Posted Jun 19, 2011, 6:25 PM
vegeta_skyline's Avatar
vegeta_skyline vegeta_skyline is offline
Registered User, Maybe
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,161
Quote:
Originally Posted by Phil McAvity View Post
Are you high?

In a city like Toronto, with it's thoroughly insipid architecture, Trump stands out like a ground-breaking architectural icon! Even if you don't like it, you can't say it's a boring box like almost all the other office towers downtown.

Toronto's skyscrapers are a barren wasteland of architectural creativity.
No I'm not high! I don't do that anymore

I'm not a big fan of all the glass boxes going up which employ 'clean simple lines'. Its been done before and done well, now its just a tired and boring form. I love set-backs, curves, sharp angles and the use of stone. That's why Scotia, Royal Bank Plaza, Shangri-la and the TD Canada Trust Tower are my favorite buildings in the city. (With L tower & Aura soon to join them, provided they stay true to the renders). But, just because I dislike glass boxes (with a few exceptions see; 4 Seasons) doesn't mean I'll automatically love all things non-box.

With Trump the promise was good but the delivery was not. Granite is a great feature for a building, unfortunately they chose the dullest looking granite available. From a distance it looks nothing more than concrete. The large blank wall on the east side is not a promising feature either. Then there's the miss-matched floors. While not being uncommon in high rises, here they are made all the more obvious by the poor choice of lime-green panels, a darker color would have been preferable. Also, its the glass which should been made to match the floor heights not the panels in-between. Given that, I don't see Trump as being a disaster but its much too flawed to be considered an icon. I simply see it as tall infill.

Now the general consensus on local forums is typically worse than that. I was mainly speaking from that perspective. I doubt that the original BAC would have incited as much disappointment/dislike as Trump has, that is all.


Quote:
Originally Posted by steveve View Post
nice stuff.... and yeah, proposal 3 wouldn't have been so bad, and 2 either (though the 2 design looks a bit more dated)... actually, the 3 design reminded me of aura for a split second... nonetheless, BA1 isn't all that horrible, but seeing 2 more of them will get old very fast. BA 1 fits perfectly on the skyline though both in height and design.
Oh yeah I agree. I liked the original as a stand alone version.
2 or 3 of them would be wayyyyy to much One pomo, just one.
__________________
EM71 = MVP

Last edited by vegeta_skyline; Jun 19, 2011 at 6:53 PM.
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 > Global Projects & Construction > Highrise Construction
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 5:12 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.