Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals

[TorontoDrew]

LOL, you are really digging your heals in. The design is so far from rubbish and a very sharp looking tower harir Pontarini has a pretty solid track record of delivering quality structures in this city. Also I'm not sure why you keep bringing up historic Victorian Toronto when this about a proposal that sits on land that never had any buildings in the first place. Unless there was some Victorian Atlantis below the lake surface only you seem to know about.

There was nothing on this lot except for maybe buried docks or sunken ships worth saving.

source: https://hariripontarini.com


Victorian Times same location.
source: https://jooinn.com

[Maldive]

LOL Drew ... zing. Water shot deserves a rimshot from Neil Peart.

I fear Dreamer may join your design macquette... wait, I hope he does.

[koops65]

Why don't you join in Maldive?

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

LOL, you are really digging your heals in. The design is so far from rubbish and a very sharp looking tower harir Pontarini has a pretty solid track record of delivering quality structures in this city. Also I'm not sure why you keep bringing up historic Victorian Toronto when this about a proposal that sits on land that never had any buildings in the first place. Unless there was some Victorian Atlantis below the lake surface only you seem to know about.

There was nothing on this lot except for maybe buried docks or sunken ships worth saving.

Digging their heels in? What exactly has happened that's supposed to have changed anyone's mind? LilZebra said he didn't like the proposal a few days ago and you seemed shocked anyone would dislike it and asked why. I and a couple others provided detailed explanations, and you and a few others said they disagreed. Is the implication that the people who didn't like it are supposed to suddenly start liking it after learning there are people with a different opinion?

In terms of the old core, I think what people are referring to is the idea of building in a more granular, human scale which represented the prevailing style of development for most of the city's history. They just wish new developments followed that pattern; I don't think anyone is implying that such developments were destroyed to make way for this one. It isn't unreasonable for a person to prefer one style of development over another without the style having been present on a specific site before. That would be like someone saying, "Instead of building a suburban strip mall, I wish our town built dense and pedestrian-oriented development like it used to." and someone replying, "That site used to be part of the forest has never been urban or pedestrian-oriented so who cares?" Well... because they want new development to follow a pattern they think is better.

Personally I'm somewhat indifferent to that aspect in this case. I agree that southcore lacks warmth, colour, or charisma from a pedestrian perspective, but I also think it's extremely valuable land in the centre of town where we probably want to squeeze in as much density as possible. But it's very difficult to create a truly charming and charismatic neighbourhoods from scratch even at smaller scales, so at least the utility it provides is a nice consolation. But I do think that newly developed areas can have a certain beauty and impressiveness to them... with the right designs.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

Toronto did have grand old buildings, sure not as nice as what the Scots built in Montreal but still much finer grained and interesting than the junk they're building today.

We had some grand old buildings. We built very ordinary looking buildings back then (with a few gems here and there). Today we build very ordinary looking buildings (with a few gems here and there). Not much has changed over the last 150 years. Finer grained than what we're building today doesn't mean they were worth saving. All it means is that we need to step up our game when it comes new construction.

[yaletown_fella]

Compared to Montréal , Toronto sorely lacks high quality beaux-arts buildings in the 6-15 floor range.

When you get to the 20+ storey range, they both have equally impressive pre-war stock.

[WhipperSnapper]

I find Beaux Arts a particularly crass movement of design anyways so I'm fine with that. Residential high rises are virtually non existent in Toronto until the 1950s and it's unfortunate that turn of the 20th century styles arn't represented. It separates us from other major centre in our region.

I don't agree at all that Toronto has built blander than others since we started building high rises. I think we are at a very low point in design compounded by how well Grid's wallpaper garbage or 88 Scott's tacky Deco inspiration has been received by our own community. That said, we have still built quality designs that can compete with any major centre and still do. One can't obsess too much on the materials (window wall vs curtain-wall) and colours. That's another one that gets too much credit on these forums. Some yellow accents doesn't turn piece of shit architectural design into a masterpiece.

Southcore has similarities. Multi-phased, twin designs sharing podiums. The scale of Sugar Wharf is supersized. Southcore development, by and large, hug the pedestrian realm. Sugar Wharf is interrupted with plazas probably meant as crowd control but, will probably end up barren, windswept landscapes like the Residences at the World Trade Centre.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Maldive

"I find the tower pleasing. It's Hariri Pontarini."

Nouvelle: Diagrid "facade detailing" aka superficial decoration, was never welcome in my books to begin with"

Guess u are saying no structural reason, no permission.

Not agreed. Ridiculous facades like 1 Yorkville.

I see the diagrid here as some filigree over massive curtainwall. Is a okay.

I also said Hariri Pontarini is completely unoriginal and, to make a point, I will audaciously say they plagiarize other designs. They can be good and I love their rendered Rogeresque office building. The appeal here is that it is 300 metres tall. Is pleasing good enough for such a prominent structure? Shouldn't it be exceptional? Does a diagrid have that much emphasis. It's also as important how both residents and visitors experience it from the ground as how it is seen in the skyline from a distance. The former is being largely forgotten except when it comes to pointing out this area is lake fill. We know! You're not getting it!

[urbandreamer]

I'm standing by my opinion: One Yonge proposal is awful. It's got a windswept suburban plaza vibe to it at grade that reminds me of the failure that is the "Success" towers complex or Absolute Miss. It's not very sophisticated.

A better idea of what should've gone here: https://www.alisonbrooksarchitects.com/project/s5/

[kool maudit]

I get more of a Chinese vibe than a suburban one from the base. It looks like one of those provincial "IFC" complexes.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

I'm standing by my opinion: One Yonge proposal is awful. It's got a windswept suburban plaza vibe to it at grade that reminds me of the failure that is the "Success" towers complex or Absolute Miss. It's not very sophisticated.

A better idea of what should've gone here: https://www.alisonbrooksarchitects.com/project/s5/

How is that even a comparative design for the site? That is for a small inner city block. This site is almost 8x the scale of what you suggested. This is'nt being built in some quaint shopping district, it's sandwiched between transportation corridor's and the lake. And I still don't see any sort of suburban look to it's podium, or the towers. Also, Toronto has been building and is currently building developments that look like the one in your link. But that are all in more appropriate parts of the city. A structure like that would look out of place at this location.

The podium reminds me a lot of One Bloor East. Nothing suburban about that tower.

source: hariripontarini.com










My only problem with the renders of the podium is that we most likely will never see this massive fountain.

source: https://s3-ca-central-1.amazonaws.com

[craner]

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

I'm standing by my opinion: One Yonge proposal is awful. It's got a windswept suburban plaza vibe to it at grade that reminds me of the failure that is the "Success" towers complex or Absolute Miss. It's not very sophisticated.

A better idea of what should've gone here: https://www.alisonbrooksarchitects.com/project/s5/

I’ll take the One Yonge proposal any day.
To each their own I suppose.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

My only problem with the renders of the podium is that we most likely will never see this massive fountain.

source: https://s3-ca-central-1.amazonaws.com

The fountain is certainly a mirage (artistic license) but the best part. Renderings aren't to be believed. They show quality glass/finishes but when they go up we usually get cheap toothpaste coloured glass, poor attention to detail, low quality materials, etc. I'll be stunned if we actually get the 10 floor Victorian style fountain surrounded by purple trees and a wide band of fountains. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised, of course.

[FrankieFlowerpot]

I love how the developers for 1 Yonge rendered a park that isn't even part of their project.



https://www.viacondos.com/new-condos/sugar-wharf-condos/

[urbandreamer]

We all know that glazing will be covered in grey spandrel so I'd rather see either textured concrete or red brick down here. A quick example:

[itom 987]

Work on this tower (Alldritt Tower) is still going ahead, they are keeping the height (280m) but widening the tower to prevent it from swaying in the wind.

This is a massing of what could be the latest design for the tower.


Source: https://edmonton.skyrisecities.com/forum...-80s-alldritt-land-kennedy.26175/page-22

[Spocket]

Can you explain the rationale behind this tower? I mean, as a proposal, it's several years old. As for timing...couldn't possibly be worse. I know it was a serious proposal of sorts but despite staying active in our news, what exactly are they waiting for if they're still pushing it ahead despite the lack positive prospects?

[Coldrsx]

The initial proposal was very ambitious with what would have been ridiculous design/construction costs and a very inefficient floor plate. This at least is more realistic...

[suburbanite]

Originally Posted by isaidso

The fountain is certainly a mirage (artistic license) but the best part. Renderings aren't to be believed. They show quality glass/finishes but when they go up we usually get cheap toothpaste coloured glass, poor attention to detail, low quality materials, etc. I'll be stunned if we actually get the 10 floor Victorian style fountain surrounded by purple trees and a wide band of fountains. I'd like to be pleasantly surprised, of course.

Agreed. How I view the end result of the insane density experiment along Queens Quay will likely come down to how well the public spaces are treated. Shitty towers can be more easily excused if they are well integrated into Waterfront Toronto's vision for an activated Lakefront with continuous boardwalk, open spaces, etc.

History tells me there's a <10% chance of that happening.

[koops65]

I made a new drawing of Aldritt:

http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/?buildingID=112424

Edmonton diagram: http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?searchID=88819898