HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive


    Holt Renfrew Tower in the SkyscraperPage Database

Building Data Page   • Comparison Diagram   • Toronto Skyscraper Diagram

Map Location
Toronto Forum   • Toronto Projects & Construction Forum

 

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #61  
Old Posted Jun 29, 2012, 9:24 PM
Davis137's Avatar
Davis137 Davis137 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2008
Posts: 2,090
That's just stupid tall. I like it.
     
     
  #62  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 12:41 AM
Spoolmak Spoolmak is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: British Columbia
Posts: 692
Quote:
Originally Posted by StatenIslander237 View Post
Nice tower, but I have to ask...what the hell does Toronto have against 1,000-foot buildings? This isn't Singapore.
This isn't Dubai either. Toronto is doing the right thing, bulking up its skyline before it adds a supertall. That way, when a supertall does finally get built, it won't look silly and out of place.

Don't forget the CN tower is the focal point of the skyline. A supertall could take away from it making it look obsolete almost.
     
     
  #63  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 6:48 AM
koops65's Avatar
koops65 koops65 is offline
Intergalactic Barfly
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quarks Bar
Posts: 5,236
A supertall in Yorkville won't detract from the CN Tower at all...
__________________
My Diagram: http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=52344624
A proud member of the former Airborne Regiment, 87-88
     
     
  #64  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 7:54 AM
J. Will J. Will is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by StatenIslander237 View Post
Nice tower, but I have to ask...what the hell does Toronto have against 1,000-foot buildings? This isn't Singapore.
Uh yeah. We have a little 1815 foot tower called the CN Tower. You might have heard of it.
     
     
  #65  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 3:34 PM
jackster99 jackster99 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Will View Post
Uh yeah. We have a little 1815 foot tower called the CN Tower. You might have heard of it.
I think he's talking about an actual usable building...as in one that is habitable with actual occupable floors. Reasonable point on statenislander's part imo
     
     
  #66  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 6:29 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,655
mind you, if you count First canadian places antennae like they seem to be counting one world trade center's, we have a building that is 3500m tall.. and we are only 2 meters short of an actual supertall.
     
     
  #67  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 8:02 PM
J. Will J. Will is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by jackster99 View Post
I think he's talking about an actual usable building...as in one that is habitable with actual occupable floors. Reasonable point on statenislander's part imo
There's nothing special about breaking 1000 feet. There's no real difference between a 1020 footer and a 960 footer for example. I look at things like architecture and amount of retail space. Height is way down the list of importance.
     
     
  #68  
Old Posted Jul 2, 2012, 8:40 PM
jackster99 jackster99 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: Boise, Idaho
Posts: 191
Quote:
Originally Posted by J. Will View Post
There's nothing special about breaking 1000 feet. There's no real difference between a 1020 footer and a 960 footer for example. I look at things like architecture and amount of retail space. Height is way down the list of importance.
Oh I agree J. Will, height is certainly not the end all be all. I think that architecture and design should carry a heavier weight then just sheer height. However, a lot of people still see a city getting a 1000 ft+ office or condo tower as a worthy benchmark to set and hopefully eventually reach. As Toronto already arguably has the third best skyline in North America (after NYC and Chicago imo), I think it is high time Toronto starts getting a 1000 footer here and there to fully put its skyline on the world stage.
     
     
  #69  
Old Posted Jul 3, 2012, 11:44 PM
Fatality's Avatar
Fatality Fatality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by koops65 View Post
A supertall in Yorkville won't detract from the CN Tower at all...
Maybe, but a supertall in a shopping district would look pretty weird and awkward.

Also, we all know that a supertall would its best near the main downtown skyline but of course it is impossible because it would ruin the CN Tower. It is because of that you don't see 1000 footers in downtown Toronto but I suppose one could hope.
__________________
Toronto~ `Big and getting Bigger`
     
     
  #70  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 2:57 AM
Redkey's Avatar
Redkey Redkey is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 156
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatality View Post
Also, we all know that a supertall would its best near the main downtown skyline but of course it is impossible because it would ruin the CN Tower. It is because of that you don't see 1000 footers in downtown Toronto but I suppose one could hope.
I dont remember 'ruining' the CN tower ever being an issue. Trump was originally approved downtown at around 1050 feet and there was no issue of it taking away the importance of the CN tower. I only think that argument would come into play if something in the 500m range would be proposed.
     
     
  #71  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 3:39 AM
DrNest's Avatar
DrNest DrNest is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: Toronto
Posts: 2,117
If you look compare the top of FCP's antennae which are around 355m, then a supertall around that height certainly wouldn't distract from the CN Tower if built in the financial core downtown.
     
     
  #72  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 8:47 AM
NYC2ATX's Avatar
NYC2ATX NYC2ATX is offline
Yank in Tex
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Location: TXpatriate
Posts: 2,173
Yeah I know the CN Tower pretty well. but yeah I mean a skyscraper in the technical use of the term, a fully habitable building. Call me crazy, but I don't think a 1,000-1,200-foot tower would upset the supremacy of the CN Tower, which would still have several hundred feet on such a building. I'm surprised Toronto doesn't have a building topping 1,000 feet yet, considering it's major role as an economic engine and cultural center for the whole of Canada...this coming from a New Yorker, I think Toronto deserves a few supertalls.
__________________
BUILD IT. BUILD EVERYTHING. BUILD IT ALL.
     
     
  #73  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 11:17 AM
koops65's Avatar
koops65 koops65 is offline
Intergalactic Barfly
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quarks Bar
Posts: 5,236
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fatality View Post
Maybe, but a supertall in a shopping district would look pretty weird and awkward.
I highly doubt that, there is already a 200 metre tower only a block away, and a 250 metre tower U/C another block away. Not to mention approximately 10 towers over 400 feet within 2 blocks already built and another 6 tall proposals nearby.
__________________
My Diagram: http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=52344624
A proud member of the former Airborne Regiment, 87-88
     
     
  #74  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 1:17 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Insertoronto
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Toronto
Posts: 5,655
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redkey View Post
I dont remember 'ruining' the CN tower ever being an issue. Trump was originally approved downtown at around 1050 feet and there was no issue of it taking away the importance of the CN tower. I only think that argument would come into play if something in the 500m range would be proposed.
Trump only got to that height with a spire though. It's roof would have been around 280m. (950ft) the only tower ever to be proposed in Toronto to actually be over 300m with no spire was the sapphire tower. (but it wasn't approved, and never really had a chance anyways)
     
     
  #75  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 2:40 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,039
     
     
  #76  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 7:18 PM
Fatality's Avatar
Fatality Fatality is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Location: Toronto
Posts: 117
Quote:
Originally Posted by Redkey View Post
I dont remember 'ruining' the CN tower ever being an issue. Trump was originally approved downtown at around 1050 feet and there was no issue of it taking away the importance of the CN tower. I only think that argument would come into play if something in the 500m range would be proposed.
True but I meant supertalls that you might see in Dubai or ones that are above 400m....For instance, even if the antennae counted on FCP I don't think anyone would look up and say "wow, what a nice supertall". Same with Trump simply because both aren't designed to be one. Any true supertalls will probably not be made because like I said it would take away from the CN, considering it is the icon of Toronto, whether you like it or not.
__________________
Toronto~ `Big and getting Bigger`
     
     
  #77  
Old Posted Jul 4, 2012, 10:56 PM
J. Will J. Will is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Posts: 3,882
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltrane74 View Post
How much retail space in the current Holt Renfrew Centre? Those malls all run together, and I don't really know where one begins and one ends.

I'm a bit confused. Is this replacing all of the current Holt Renfrew Centre, Cumberland Terrace, and 60 Bloor Street West?
     
     
  #78  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2012, 2:18 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 11,617
Should just be Holt Renfrew Centre. 60 Bloor should be unaffected and Cumberland terrace is seperated to the north and east and will be redeveloped in Oxford's plans.
     
     
  #79  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2012, 4:10 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by Spoolmak View Post
This isn't Dubai either. Toronto is doing the right thing, bulking up its skyline before it adds a supertall. That way, when a supertall does finally get built, it won't look silly and out of place.

Don't forget the CN tower is the focal point of the skyline. A supertall could take away from it making it look obsolete almost.
I do find skyline's like Taipei awkward due to a super tall dwarfing the rest of the skyline, but Toronto has bulked up enough. It's ready for a few 300m+ or 400m+ buildings.

I'd qualify that the CN Tower is the focal point of the skyline for now. The idea that it must always tower over everything else or remain the tallest is just bizarre. Vibrant cities continue to change, grow, and evolve. The CN Tower is just one part of the evolution of our skyline; dynamic cities continually build new focal points. Paris isn't stopping with the Eiffel Tower and New York isn't stopping with the Empire State building.
__________________
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
     
     
  #80  
Old Posted Jul 5, 2012, 4:14 PM
isaidso isaidso is offline
The New Republic
 
Join Date: Dec 2008
Location: United Provinces of America
Posts: 9,431
Quote:
Originally Posted by StatenIslander237 View Post
Yeah I know the CN Tower pretty well. but yeah I mean a skyscraper in the technical use of the term, a fully habitable building. Call me crazy, but I don't think a 1,000-1,200-foot tower would upset the supremacy of the CN Tower, which would still have several hundred feet on such a building. I'm surprised Toronto doesn't have a building topping 1,000 feet yet, considering it's major role as an economic engine and cultural center for the whole of Canada...this coming from a New Yorker, I think Toronto deserves a few supertalls.
Agree 100%. I'm waiting for the next 400, 500, or 600 m building to play off the CN Tower, to be honest.
__________________
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
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > Buildings & Architecture > Never Built & Visionary Projects > Cancelled Project Threads Archive
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 10:16 AM.

     

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