Canada's 10 Tallest U/C - Page 357

WhipperSnapper · #**7121** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 7:32 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Hey I use carrier bag for all my shit. It was wrong of me to comment on his style. Let's move on.

Oh hell no. Nothing wrong for critiquing his style. The purse threw me off guard. It was out of character too. Makes sense now.

TorontoDrew · #**7122** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 8:06 PM**

Again, I apologies for my terrible comment and not realizing how some might take it the wrong way. It was careless on my part.

Hoping to move forward and get this back on track here is 160 Front Street West as of last week. They look to have completed the second below ground level now. Does anybody know how many floors bellow grade this will go? I can't find the information.

Posted on: urbantoronto.ca
Taken by Edward Skiera

FrankieFlowerpot · #**7123** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 9:55 PM**

4 levels of UG here

travis3000 · #**7124** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 11:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

Again, I apologies for my terrible comment and not realizing how some might take it the wrong way. It was careless on my part.

Hoping to move forward and get this back on track here is 160 Front Street West as of last week. They look to have completed the second below ground level now. Does anybody know how many floors bellow grade this will go? I can't find the information.

Posted on: urbantoronto.ca
Taken by Edward Skiera

Haha no prob man, I am gay but took no offence the the purse comment. Some guys can pull it off I guess? They aren't my cup of tea but each to their own

160 Front has a big hole , this is one tower that will make a big impact on the skyline. It's a similar height to CIBC Square, Im a bit nervous how it will turn out but I remain optimistic.

As for your question, I believe it goes down 4 floors.

suburbanite · #**7125** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 11:27 PM**

Isn't 160 Front a fair bit shorter than CIBC after they made it squatter? Not a fan of the stubby new look, thought the dimensions just worked at the original height.

Surprised they were willing to take a gamble on filling up 16 York during construction yet didn't do the same here even with Teachers and TD backstopping a big chunk of space. Wonder if they really think there's going to be a market downturn and they're just squeezing this one past the finish line.

FrankieFlowerpot · #**7126** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 11:36 PM**

It's 240m tall vs CIBC at 241m

koops65 · #**7127** Posted **Dec 9, 2019, 11:39 PM**

160 Front is 240 metres, and the CIBC Square tower now U/C is 238 metres, while the one yet to be built will be 241 metres...

uzi · #**7128** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 12:08 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

source: https://cdn.skyrisecities.com
forum member: ushahid

sorry this was not my pic. i posted it with the credits. if it was my pic it would have been much nicer.

Nouvellecosse · #**7129** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 12:39 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by suburbanite

Isn't 160 Front a fair bit shorter than CIBC after they made it squatter? Not a fan of the stubby new look, thought the dimensions just worked at the original height.

Oh god... first "homophobia", now FAT SHAMING!! This thread's really going down hill.

travis3000 · #**7130** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 1:06 AM**

240m is still a decent size for an office tower. Taller than:

-The Bow and Telus Sky in Calgary
-1250 René-Lévesque in Montreal
-Bay Wellington Tower, Toronto Dominion Centre, Bay Adelaide West & East in Toronto

So not a slouch, could have been bigger yes I agree but still has potential.

GeneralLeeTPHLS · #**7131** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 1:24 AM**

Not much to say with the height really, it's absolutely MASSIVE either way, especially for that corner. (I don't see much significance with the height being dropped a bit...wraggling over height is a bit silly when it's planned for 240 metres in height, which is HUGE for Toronto) It'll be substantial in the skyline and it'll be very interesting to see this building from the CN tower.

TorontoDrew · #**7132** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 1:49 AM**

It looks like they might be almost 13.5 m deep now. So crane(s) might only be around the corner. Maybe late January?

WhipperSnapper · #**7133** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 2:56 PM**

I don't care how the height stacks up to other buildings.

It's fat. Hopefully, the scalloped facade does a better job distracting from the stunted, bulbous form than pinstripes on Babe Ruth.

I thought they were keeping more of the demolished building than the front facade. Big budget building. They could of afforded to go one or two parking levels deeper on the west side and leave the wood framed building largely intact.

travis3000 · #**7134** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 3:52 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I don't care how the height stacks up to other buildings.

It's fat. Hopefully, the scalloped facade does a better job distracting from the stunted, bulbous form than pinstripes on Babe Ruth.

I thought they were keeping more of the demolished building than the front facade. Big budget building. They could of afforded to go one or two parking levels deeper on the west side and leave the wood framed building largely intact.

Nothing wrong with a bit of beef

TorontoDrew · #**7135** Posted **Dec 10, 2019, 4:49 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I thought they were keeping more of the demolished building than the front facade. Big budget building. They could of afforded to go one or two parking levels deeper on the west side and leave the wood framed building largely intact.

It was always just the front.

source: https://www.dezeen.com