Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals

[TallBob]

Quite frankly, I like some of those buildings in Atlanta, Charlotte, Philly, and a few others. The 80's & 90's had some pretty nice buildings. The fact that they look dated... who cares! You look at the Empire State building and you what era/dates it came from, but who cares as long as you like it.

[yaletown_fella]

I'd personally love to see more po-mo skyscrapers, especially around College Park or Bloor and Sherborne.

The one vegeta_skyline posted is probably one of the finest examples of its era.

I love Toronto's older modernist stock too (esp. TD Center and Imperial Oil Building), but I'm not a fan of the grossly overrated neo-modernist condominium projects. All they do is appropriate a pastiche of modern "styles" without any understanding of the underlying ideologies.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

All they do is appropriate a pastiche of modern "styles" without any understanding of the underlying ideologies.

Tell that to the architects. Buildings like Spire, LightBox, Karma, MLQ, Burano, Casa and so on that so many of you complain about really are few and far between in the grand scheme of things. And I'm sure the architects know that the design they are providing us with will stand the test of time unlike so many other buildings that try to hard and fail like in Concord Pacific's Cityplace, or Pinnacle. I'd still be happy if we were to see another 20 proposals around the city like those mentioned above. For Gods sake we have over 100 highrises u/c in this city, if a half dozen resemble Spire so be it. It could be much worse and BSN could be the flavour of the month. I know a lot of cities that would kill for 90 York and 10 Harbour.

taken by Seekdes on flickr.com

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline

I hope 88 Scott is the start of a new design trend. We've got far too many glass boxes with no articulation in this city, what we really need is something along these lines;

That's a lot of confidence you are putting in a rendering. I am curious. Were you using Trump's rendering or the actually product for your side by side comparisons?

These building are pricey to pull off successfully. I don't see Concert willing to fork out the dough or the design factory, Page + Stele/IBI, having a high moral standard. Dickinson hasn't been around for now over 50 years.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

I know a lot of cities that would kill for 90 York and 10 Harbour.]

Good, they can have them.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Good, they can have them.

Agree. I always find the "most cities would kill for these" arguments really lame. We're a dynamic global city aspiring to greatness, and we should accept what ever because other cities do? We'll never get to that next level with that kind of thinking.

[caltrane74]

No I'll take them. Most, cities don't get skyscrapers, they get empty lots and no money. They can keep that 🞵🞵🞵🞵. These towers are future infill, as our skyline grows outwards and upwards they'll become background noise in what is bound to be the largest skyline in North America after New York. Greatness has been hefted upon us. We need to start dealing with it.

Side note:

One Bloor building envelope can reach 265 meters, as per previous height of the old Bazis Proposal, that should give them enough wiggle room to add the 5 extra floors without too much fuss from the city.

[Gresto]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

One Bloor building envelope can reach 265 meters, as per previous height of the old Bazis Proposal, that should give them enough wiggle room to add the 5 extra floors without too much fuss from the city.

The previous 1 Bloor was 281 metres.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Agree. I always find the "most cities would kill for these" arguments really lame. We're a dynamic global city aspiring to greatness, and we should accept what ever because other cities do? We'll never get to that next level with that kind of thinking.

Sorry, not every one of our 100 or so highrises u/c can be innovative, it's just not possible without ending up looking like a mish-mash of styles. If that's what you like then Dubai might be the city for you. This look that so many of you seem to hate is a style that is very Toronto and helps bring some level of coherency to our skyline. If we need to use one style as our mainstay then I think the Casa look is a great one to use. If you like we could be using the City place buildings as our staple design year. Seriously, how many different design do you want?

I would however like the city require more consultation with a panel of architects when approving large scale projects, and height should only be given to designs that are passed by the peers of the developers.

And yes a ton of cities would kill for these towers, just because you're bored of them does not make them bad architecture, that argument is flawed.

[vanman]

Not sure of the exact height of this proposal, but at over 40 stories hopefully it'll be able to squeeze onto this list.

Originally Posted by phesto

Here's a rendering of Westbank's Howe and Beach proposal (coming soon):

http://www.glessnergroup.com/images/20/img_glessner_12.jpg

[TheMaxMan]

That's a pretty trippy design. Hope it moves from proposal to reality.

[Andrewjm3D]

Perfect. Though I'd hate a unit in one of those short shard buildings, how crappy of a view and what a lack of sunlight any purchaser there will have.

[vanman]

^Those shard buildings could end up being office or amenity space and are not neccesarily condos. Although not much info for this project has been leaked yet.

[vegeta_skyline]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

Buildings like Spire, LightBox, Karma, MLQ, Burano, Casa and so on that so many of you complain about really are few and far between in the grand scheme of things. And I'm sure the architects know that the design they are providing us with will stand the test of time unlike so many other buildings that try to hard and fail like in Concord Pacific's Cityplace, or Pinnacle. [/IMG]

First off, I don't see anyone here complaining about most of the examples you've given (i.e. Spire, LightBox, Burano, Casa). But Karma is pure drivel imo. The issue here is that these new buildings are far more prominent than the cities existing stock of buildings,save for perhaps the bank towers. Thus they will come to define the city far more then the previous generation. I think its a fairly safe to say the current building boom won't continue ad infinitum, so its important that we pay attention to designs going up here and now. While I certainly don't have a problem with 2 or 3 "Sp!re's". A dozen or so would be nothing but a sea of monotony and personally I think Toronto deserves better. And by better I mean a building like Charlotte's Bank of America or Vancouver's Woodward's or even just more of this;


Image courtesy of Atlantis on UT

Image courtesy of udo on UT

Image courtesy of condosintoronto4u.ca

http://blog.mycondomylife.com/cityzen-developments/absolute-world/

from Toronto Life

http://livehigh.com/toronto/waterfront/condo/picasso_on_richmond


Also, while the consensus seems to be that city place as a whole isn't the greatest of developments, individually some CP buildings - Luna, Panorama, Montage and TCHC Block 31(yes separate developer, but still an inseparable part of the community) are generally seen in a positive light.

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Were you using Trump's rendering or the actually product for your side by side comparisons?

These building are pricey to pull off successfully.

Naturally the final product. Of course I understand your point, that some of Trump's flaws weren't very evident in the render, so it remains to be seen just how closely 88 Scott will abide by its own render. However, I don't think its a stretch to suggest that most of the excitement that Trump generated was largely based off its height, not its design merits. Comparing the two buildings solely by the rendering, I don't thik it would be a stretch to say that most people would regard 88 Scott as the superior design;


I just hope they discard those random boxes.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline

First off, I don't see anyone here complaining about most of the examples you've given (i.e. Spire, LightBox, Burano, Casa). But Karma is pure drivel imo. The issue here is that these new buildings are far more prominent than the cities existing stock of buildings.

And once again, have you seen the final designs or renders? So far all we've seen is a fuzzy massing image. Unless you have some sort of crystal ball I'm not quite sure how you can pass judgement on buildings you have yet to see.

It's also ironic that in your argument with WhipperSnapper you say you can't judge a building by it's render until complete.

So what is it, should we prejudge from crappy renders and google maps, or not judge from fancy renders? Your message is confusing. Are you an Occupy protester?

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by vanman

^Those shard buildings could end up being office or amenity space and are not neccesarily condos. Although not much info for this project has been leaked yet.

Well that would be an ideal use for them.

[vegeta_skyline]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

And once again, have you seen the final designs or renders? So far all we've seen is a fuzzy massing image.

We know the design for Karma, its more than just a fuzzy image;

http://urbantoronto.ca/news/2011/11/scale-model-reveals-more-detail-karmas-design

As for 90 Harbour, we do have a rendering;

http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread....our-St-%28Menkes-31s-2x-70s-aA%29/page48

Sure its not very clear but it gives us an idea and clearly we're not impressed by the suggested design.
And that's the key point here. We're dissecting this specific design. If the final product is drastically different, our opinions may change just as drastically. So exactly why its wrong to express our opinion on an image that has been publicly released?

It's also ironic that in your argument with WhipperSnapper you say you can't judge a building by it's render until complete.

I've agreed with the point he made, so explain to me just how its an "argument"

[Andrewjm3D]

But you're judging from a render, and yet you say don't judge from a render. Which is it?

Karma kicks 🞵🞵🞵 BTW. Remember it's infill.

[vegeta_skyline]

Seriously, just are your talking about?

This is what I said;

so it remains to be seen just how closely 88 Scott will abide by its own render

That does not mean; don't judge a building by its rendering
That means; I have judged this building already based on its rendering, but that opinion is subject to change after seeing the final built form

I'm hopeful that you won't misinterpret that, because I don't think I can make it any simpler.


When I said;

I've agreed with the point he made

Again, that point was not "don't judge a building by its render"
That point was - "Certain design details are not clearly evident in a rendering"
i.e - the actual quality of the materials used, the specific color of spandrel panel's or just how much floors with varying heights will actually stick out, etc, etc.

But obviously a buildings general built form is not going to change that drastically from a rendering. A minimalistic box is not going to change into a PoMo building once built. That is what my issue is with certain proposals - the buildings massing/form.


And I'm not even going to get into any debate on Karma, all I'll say is that that's one hell of a sad excuse for a 'kick 🞵🞵🞵 building'

[dleung]

^^Well, if there's anything to be learned from how this forum works (at least for those on a certain brand of booster juice), it is that for any given project:

-initial render cannot be judged negatively until polished render comes out
-polished render cannot be judged negatively until under construction
-u/c projects cannot be judged negatively until cladding is up
-cladding cannot be judged negatively until construction is complete
-finished constructions cannot be judged negatively until the LED lights are installed
-fully complete projects cannot be judged negatively because it's finished and nothing you can do about it

-praise is always welcome