Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals

[urbandreamer]

Clearly that's mr BIG's Westbank project? Toronto's version should be announced soon.

[Chadillaccc]

Originally Posted by 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

HAHA! Truer words have never been spoken... on this forum at least.


I mean... BOOO at you and your not status-quo enforcing!

[vanman]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Clearly that's mr BIG's Westbank project? Toronto's version should be announced soon.

Yessir!

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Clearly that's mr BIG's Westbank project? Toronto's version should be announced soon.

Probably not a supertall, right?

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline

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 for one don't find 88 Scott as a superior deisgn. I don't care for the transition from concrete to glass, the incorporation of the facade and the overall podium, or the glass boxes on top of the setbacks although I understand the reasoning for them. They aid in giving the impression of setbacks when there really aren't any. I'm much more impressed by Uptown's massing eventhough the setbacks are far from perfect.

[vegeta_skyline]

Fair enough, maybe I was mistaken to suggest the majority would view 88 Scott as better based solely off the rendering.
Anyone else care to chime in?


Funny how in both renders, Scotia plaza is seen directly behind them.

[caltrane74]

Originally Posted by LeftCoaster

No it won't be.

It will be near or under 100m

Oh geez. Why even bother?

[LeftCoaster]

Haha well where it will be built it will stand out, but it wont be nearly as tall as his Vancouver or Montreal projects.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by 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

Sweet my all knowing troll is back.

All I was saying was that a forumer can't tell others not to judge a building by a render and then turn around and do the same. Praising or not. Mind you in your case anything that is remotely a praise of a building in Toronto is viewed as nothing more then an opinion by a hack with no sense of what good design is. But I'm sure you knew that, I don't think you're that big of an idiot even though you like to act like one.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by vegeta_skyline

Fair enough, maybe I was mistaken to suggest the majority would view 88 Scott as better based solely off the rendering.
Anyone else care to chime in?


Funny how in both renders, Scotia plaza is seen directly behind them.

It has great massing, but so far we've only seen the one angle. Maybe if I have a chance I'll build it so we can get a better feel of how it will appear at all 360°'s. From the street this should be a winner as the tower will rise about 80ft up from the limestone base, so materials used even precast and windo-wall could be fine. I'm more looking forward to the updating of the section of existing building on Wellington street that was built back in the 60-70's. The new Glass enclosure may be the best part of the design.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

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

Oh wow has the standard for "kick 🞵🞵🞵" buildings dropped..

The only thing that makes me accept Karma as a building is that it will only provide density and nothing more.

Meanwhile the drivel that aA puked out at 90 Harbour is going to make an impact and be a blight on the skyline forever. Until, that is, something else hopefully blocks it from view.

[steveve]

LOL!!!! funny observation with the scotia plaza thing!!!! that's cooL!!!!!

[dleung]

Originally Posted by Andrewjm3D

Sweet my all knowing troll is back.

All I was saying was that a forumer can't tell others not to judge a building by a render and then turn around and do the same. Praising or not. Mind you in your case anything that is remotely a praise of a building in Toronto is viewed as nothing more then an opinion by a hack with no sense of what good design is. But I'm sure you knew that, I don't think you're that big of an idiot even though you like to act like one.

Relax, coppercab... I wasn't even referring to you; just making an observation in general... am I not totally right about it? Plus everyone else knows I criticize Vancouver buildings way more often.

[vanman]

^ Calling you a troll is a cheap argument. I can agree that you can sometimes be overly critical, but at least your critiques are well thought out and constructive.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Oh wow has the standard for "kick 🞵🞵🞵" buildings dropped..

The only thing that makes me accept Karma as a building is that it will only provide density and nothing more.

Meanwhile the drivel that aA puked out at 90 Harbour is going to make an impact and be a blight on the skyline forever. Until, that is, something else hopefully blocks it from view.

I appreciate someone wanting pizazz. We all desire more however, calling 90 Harbour a blight is a tad much considering the attention to detail Clewes, Wallman, Bregman put into their projects . At the very least we can presume that they won't be awful spandrel towers that are quickly taking over the landscape and that thought actually went into designing the retail/podium.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by vanman

^ Calling you a troll is a cheap argument. I can agree that you can sometimes be overly critical, but at least your critiques are well thought out and constructive.

Calling Dleung a troll is a cheap argument although I don't find him constructive even if his critiques maybe well thought out. He's too narrow minded and dismissive of everything that doesn't suit his precise mold. We all are stubborn to our preferred aestethics however, he takes it to a whole other level.

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I appreciate someone wanting pizazz. We all desire more however, calling 90 Harbour a blight is a tad much considering the attention to detail Clewes, Wallman, Bregman put into their projects . At the very least we can presume that they won't be awful spandrel towers that are quickly taking over the landscape and that thought actually went into designing the retail/podium.

They may be good with details like their type of glass and what a corner looks like, but come on, what details are in this thing? It's a square tower with wraparound balconies, about the simplest thing you can possibly get, a round tower with wraparound balconies, barely a step up, and a box office tower with a couple cuts into the front of it. Funny enough, the office tower has the most detail out of all of them.

They may pay attention to details, but when your design has no details whatsoever, that trait becomes useless. Small details are noticed by an architecture expert looking closely at every nook and cranny, but it's the big details (or lack thereof) that really stick out to 99% of the population.

[WhipperSnapper]

99% of the population doesn't read skyscraperpage.com and 97% of the 99% wouldn't even notice a 75 storey tower behind them. Perhaps my familiarity with condo development has led to lower expectations or it's the number of projects that tried but, ultimately failed miserably. I'll gladly take a square tower with wraparound balconies which allows a high attention to details than a spandrel covered nightmare composed of poorly conceived curves, setbacks, and/or precast elements. I can only hope the P+S design team are a competent group and the budget allows them the freedom to use all their capabilities.

[Andrewjm3D]

Originally Posted by vanman

^ Calling you a troll is a cheap argument. I can agree that you can sometimes be overly critical, but at least your critiques are well thought out and constructive.

You don't know our history.

Deleung I'm willing to call a truce if you are. I know you have a lot to bring to the table and I do respect you, believe it or not. Lets not turn this into SSP.

WhipperSnapper, I apologies, I'm just as guilty of prejudging good or bad like you from renders. I will from now on not jump on you or others from posting on your judgements, I suggest we all do the same. All of our opinions here are valid.

Canadian cities big and small are all seeing strong growth and some great designs while much of the world struggles. For that we should all be proud.

[vanman]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

99% of the population doesn't read skyscraperpage.com and 97% of the 99% wouldn't even notice a 75 storey tower behind them. Perhaps my familiarity with condo development has led to lower expectations or it's the number of projects that tried but, ultimately failed miserably. I'll gladly take a square tower with wraparound balconies which allows a high attention to details than a spandrel covered nightmare composed of poorly conceived curves, setbacks, and/or precast elements. I can only hope the P+S design team are a competent group and the budget allows them the freedom to use all their capabilities.

You just described the Capitol Residences perfectly lol:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Taken by SFUVancouver, February 13th, 2011.

Although it looks much better from this angle:

Originally Posted by SFUVancouver

Taken by SFUVancouver, March 16th, 2011.