Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by Gresto

I admit my tastes in modern skyscraper architecture are quite conservative, but I'm glad none of that junk was built in Toronto, save for the Moscow cluster. That twirly ice-cream-cone-shaped thing in London is an atrocity, imo.

Of course, it's the law that all Torontonian architecture buffs think everything that isn't some modernist bore is a tacky atrocity. That's why this city won't get anything worth a damn.

[niwell]

These kind of disagreements about what constitutes "good design" is precisely why the City should not rush to approve something because it's shiny and designed by someone famous.

I personally like the London buildings (the Shard considerably more than the the other one posted), but I do believe they had to go through some pretty massive hurdles in order to get built. Wasn't the Shard originally proposed well over a decade ago?

[The_Architect]

Originally Posted by niwell

Wasn't the Shard originally proposed well over a decade ago?

Yes, but then after a decade of hurdles, London gets the Shard.

We get Trump and Bay-Adelaide, which isn't terrible but isn't anything to look twice at.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Yes, but then after a decade of hurdles, London gets the Shard.

We get Trump and Bay-Adelaide, which isn't terrible but isn't anything to look twice at.

And, yesterday was a hurdle for Gehry/Mirvish.

[Gresto]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Of course, it's the law that all Torontonian architecture buffs think everything that isn't some modernist bore is a tacky atrocity. That's why this city won't get anything worth a damn.

I'm far, far from an authority architecture, but I am an artist, and I do know what I like aesthetically and what I don't like. That swirl is kitsch, to my eyes, and I sure hope we never get anything like that here. Mind you, I'm not automatically opposed to ornamentation. Art deco is by far my favourite style of architecture, Beaux Arts is beautiful, and, as for more recent styles, I like the pared-down simplicity of '60s and '70s modernism.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by DrNest

Although not the nation's capital, Toronto is the financial capital of Canada.

Yes, but being a national capital brings a certain pomp and circumstance to a city. They'll be more picky.

Originally Posted by DrNest

Additionally, as a percentage of the country's total population, more people live in the GTA than in London. From what I recall the figure is about 16% for the GTA compared to 12% for London. Not a huge difference, but one that puts them on a par.

True, but not totally relevant. Shanghai is a tiny portion of China's population.

Originally Posted by DrNest

I agree that there is more money in the likes of London and Paris, but I wouldn't say that was grounds for Toronto not needing to build higher.

It's the reason for fancier tall, and since they can afford it and they want to go tall the same reason people here want Toronto to be tall they build tall.

[waterloowarrior]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

.[/URL]

If you could see this city approving and building any of these then we see this city very, very differently.

So far the only skyscraper in this recent boom that would even get a second glance outside of Toronto is the L Tower, and even that was significantly cheapened from its original design.

The UK planning process is also quite different. They can put all sorts of conditions on planning permission, while the City cannot put conditions on zoning. Once Council approve the increased height and massing, the site could be sold and anything else could be put there. Although some benefits could be part of a Section 37 agreement (allows more density in exchange for community benefits), good design and architecture are not eligible.

The Shard had a three year approvals processing involving an inquiry from the deputy prime minister/secretary of state of the UK. It was also reduced from 400m to 306m over the design process . You can see the details and conditions of his approval here http://image.guardian.co.uk/sys-files/Society/documents/2003/11/19/ShardofGlass.doc

[FrankieFlowerpot]

Demo progress at 88 Scott this morning

[caltrane74]

Moving a bit faster than I expected...

Nice.

[OTSkyline]

88 Scott is one of the proposals I'm very excited for. I love the height, the details and the mix of glass and concrete/stone/whatever...

Should look very nice

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by OTSkyline

88 Scott is one of the proposals I'm very excited for. I love the height, the details and the mix of glass and concrete/stone/whatever...

Should look very nice

Here's a high res rendering from Urban Toronto:

[Gresto]

I still think it's highly unfortunate that the original design was altered. To what end?

[WhipperSnapper]

I think ths one is an improvement over the old version. First, it will appear taller from the south. Second, the cramped , busy number of setbacks for the penthouse levels topped with a large spandrel clad mech penthouse has been streamlined with improved incorporation of the mech.

The end result is a better crown that also minimizes it's shadow impact. Win/win.

[Dylan Leblanc]

Any reduced shadowing must be miniscule. Is there a certain spot the building would have casted a shadow on before that it won't now?

[Innsertnamehere]

The redesign created a building that is roughly 4 or 5 floors "shorter" in shadows, so it does have an impact.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by Beedok

Moscow: 15,788,000 (and flush with new oil money)
Paris: 10,869,000 (and pretty thoroughly built out, now they're needing to build up)
London: 9,576,000 (see Paris, and add more money)
Toronto: 6,184,000 (least dense city on this list, also 90% that number includes at least Hamilton which really shouldn't be counted for these purposes)

So you expect Toronto to compete with cities 2-3 times it's size, which have more money and more need for highrises and are national capitals? Toronto is not declining, the rest of the world is just rising and that's a good thing.

Paris is wealthier than Toronto, but the other 2 certainly are NOT. I'm not sure why Canadians continually view London as a wealthy city, but the data does not support that. I'm from London originally. It's wealthier than the rest of Britain, but very average by Canadian standards.

Belgravia is not how most Londoners live. Vauxhall is more representative. And don't even get me started on British housing. You'd be shocked if you saw 'average' London housing.

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by Dylan Leblanc

Any reduced shadowing must be miniscule. Is there a certain spot the building would have casted a shadow on before that it won't now?

St. James Park, I think.

[Beedok]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Paris is wealthier than Toronto, but the other 2 certainly are NOT. I'm not sure why Canadians continually view London as a wealthy city, but the data does not support that. I'm from London originally. It's wealthier than the rest of Britain, but very average by Canadian standards.

Belgravia is not how most Londoners live. Vauxhall is more representative. And don't even get me started on British housing. You'd be shocked if you saw 'average' London housing.

Based off what I could find London's GDP is 5th in the world, Paris is 6th, Moscow in 9th, and Toronto is like 38th or something way down the list. Another kept London and Paris equal, moved Moscow down to about 11th, and saw Toronto at maybe 24th. The most pro-Toronto list I could find sees Paris a 3rd, London at 4th, Moscow at 11th, and Toronto at 15th. Paris and London both sat at about 750 billion, Moscow 325 billion, and Toronto about 270 billion on Toronto's best and at no point was Toronto above half the GDP of London or Paris.

Yes, the average Londoner might not be that well off, and the average Muscovite certainly isn't, but that's irrelevant when we're talking about the construction of supertall Office Towers and Luxury Condos. The average Torontonian isn't that great off either, at least not compared to the average Canadian, yet there's an exceptional concentration of towers in Toronto because there's a lot of money there, it's just (as always) in the hands of the elite.

[WhipperSnapper]

Toronto doesn't have billionaires consistently paying 25 million plus for a residence in our city. Office rents in London are minimium five times what they are here. Lots of companies with offices there just to say they have a London office. It's a first rate world centre despite residents not being able to afford more than a couple beers for lunch.

Our home grown financial industry has become even more economical as they expand southwards aquiring companies with massive debt loads. Something like the Shard is so out of the realm of possibilities now as these corporations continue to reconfigure spaces into HVAC overloading sweatshops. At some point, the people will revolt but, for now, it's pointless to expect anything but a design offering the highest efficiency. At the very least, some being built are outstanding examples of their style.

[yaletown_fella]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

I think ths one is an improvement over the old version. First, it will appear taller from the south. Second, the cramped , busy number of setbacks for the penthouse levels topped with a large spandrel clad mech penthouse has been streamlined with improved incorporation of the mech.

The end result is a better crown that also minimizes it's shadow impact. Win/win.

I think the new "crown" looks awkward. It was a shame as the old design looked more coherent overall. The randomly protruding glass boxes look crappy.

Just have to keep fingers crossed that we get soothing a little higher end than the typical P&S value engineering (considering the location and higher prices they're charging) but that's wishful thinking.