HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Closed Thread

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #7461  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 2:28 PM
sdimedru sdimedru is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 741
^ are you all reffering to the London proposal? Because I really don't mind the Adelaide one...

(I do think the top/cap? could be improved)
     
     
  #7462  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 3:02 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 22,898
^I'm going to go ahead and say the Toronto one. Yeah, the Adelaide one is awful whether you don't mind it or not.
     
     
  #7463  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 3:51 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,204
It's so small, nobody will see it. Who cares.
     
     
  #7464  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 4:47 PM
koops65's Avatar
koops65 koops65 is offline
Intergalactic Barfly
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Quarks Bar
Posts: 8,838
^^^ Yeah it's tiny... it'll only be about 160 - 170 metres tall... lol
     
     
  #7465  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 5:08 PM
Martin Mtl's Avatar
Martin Mtl Martin Mtl is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2002
Posts: 9,075
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltrane74 View Post
It's so small, nobody will see it. Who cares.
You don't care what a 170 meters tower looks because for you it's tinny? Are you genuinely indifferent to the architecture of such a tower in a central district of Toronto? Is that what it comes down to, for you, now? Anything under 200 meters is not significant enough for you to even care about the design? Or is it just a "blasé" game you're playing to suggest that Toronto is in such another league now that such tower is not even worth taking notice of?
     
     
  #7466  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 5:13 PM
FrankieFlowerpot's Avatar
FrankieFlowerpot FrankieFlowerpot is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 3,478
It's also an office/hotel proposal now - no residential.

47 floors
     
     
  #7467  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 5:19 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Mtl View Post
You don't care what a 170 meters tower looks because for you it's tinny? Are you genuinely indifferent to the architecture of such a tower in a central district of Toronto? Is that what it comes down to, for you, now? Anything under 200 meters is not significant enough for you to even care about the design? Or is it just a "blasé" game you're playing to suggest that Toronto is in such another league now that such tower is not even worth taking notice of?
There are 5000 guys at urbantoronto.ca, that spin their heads around design and architecture 24/7. Like I said before, I don't find the tower that offensive, especially at this height in the Entertainment District, it will disappear. Nothing to lose any sleep over, that's for sure.
     
     
  #7468  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 5:31 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 22,898
I'll begrudgingly accept that you don't finding the design offensive or the proposed plan for this tiny site is ridiculous. This is one where the discussion of sightlines is more than just an aesthetic concern (although shadowing pretty much still covers the bases. ) Finally, an opinion on the design.


C'mon, tiny or it will disppear in the Entertainment district?
     
     
  #7469  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 5:40 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 22,898
Quote:
Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot View Post
It's also an office/hotel proposal now - no residential.

47 floors
They got sent to the curb with residential. City loves to hear about new office development but, this is still going to be easily rejected.
     
     
  #7470  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 6:17 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,204
Quote:
Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper View Post
I'll begrudgingly accept that you don't finding the design offensive or the proposed plan for this tiny site is ridiculous. This is one where the discussion of sightlines is more than just an aesthetic concern (although shadowing pretty much still covers the bases. ) Finally, an opinion on the design.


C'mon, tiny or it will disppear in the Entertainment district?
Ok, not right now. But when the area begins is construction build out, and if this thing even gets approved (which it won't) , by then larger projects would have begun.
     
     
  #7471  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 6:28 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 22,898
It's not the tallest proposed, built, or under construction but, it's height is still well above average. What's still to come is just speculation.
     
     
  #7472  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 7:57 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 12,902
if built today it would be one of the tallest buildings in the Entertainment District. It's not small.
     
     
  #7473  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 8:05 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,204
RBc Center/ Shangrila/ and Ritz are taller.
     
     
  #7474  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 9:28 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 12,902
^not really in the entertainment district in the traditional sense. currently, the tallest is TIFF and Theatre Park, which are both 157m.
     
     
  #7475  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 9:28 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 12,902
319 Jarvis

     
     
  #7476  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 9:40 PM
HomeInMyShoes's Avatar
HomeInMyShoes HomeInMyShoes is offline
arf
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: File 13
Posts: 14,625
We tacked Hearst onto one side and a bit of a really uninspiring design and now it's still a really uninspiring design.
     
     
  #7477  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 10:16 PM
GeneralLea's Avatar
GeneralLea GeneralLea is offline
Midtowner since 2K
 
Join Date: Aug 2015
Location: Midtown Toronto
Posts: 5,984
Quote:
Originally Posted by Gresto View Post
McMansions are an absolute plague where I live. Some streets are infested with them. Not only are they socially deplorable, but most of them are tacky and built on the ultra-cheap (to recoup the cost of the lot), and their construction results in aggravation and inconvenience for residents (noise, dirt, bulldozers all about, torn-up roads from all the utility cuts).

Here's a street not too far from where I live that is almost 100% McMansion infested: https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.7276513,-...S_1wDrj494fXqj1chE3QQ!2e0!7i13312!8i6656
As much as I dislike them, I'm starting to get used to them. They're quite annoying sights, but once you see them all over the place, the ugliness becomes dull. Dull ugliness is still horrid, but it's just an advanced state of being exposed to mansionism.

When you said Mcmansion, I thought of actually big — mansions, like in Brampton, where the houses are just really non-dense and huge. Those Toronto examples to me are just tacky reno's that do no favours to the housing market and are honestly somewhat selfish looking.
     
     
  #7478  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 10:32 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 10,725
Quote:
Originally Posted by Martin Mtl View Post
You don't care what a 170 meters tower looks because for you it's tinny? Are you genuinely indifferent to the architecture of such a tower in a central district of Toronto? Is that what it comes down to, for you, now? Anything under 200 meters is not significant enough for you to even care about the design? Or is it just a "blasé" game you're playing to suggest that Toronto is in such another league now that such tower is not even worth taking notice of?
It will be about as beautiful a tower as Le Peterson. Some will like it some won't. From some angles it will look good and from other awkward. My gut tells me this design is nowhere near complete on this building.
     
     
  #7479  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 10:46 PM
ue ue is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Apr 2009
Location: WPG
Posts: 9,493
Looks like Encore in Edmonton is going ahead...

Quote:
Originally Posted by Coldrsx View Post
     
     
  #7480  
Old Posted Feb 16, 2017, 11:27 PM
LeftCoaster's Avatar
LeftCoaster LeftCoaster is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Nov 2005
Location: Toroncouver
Posts: 13,166
For us non-locals can you remind us of what that one is?
     
     
This discussion thread continues

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

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 12:06 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2026, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.