Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals

[DrNest]

That depends on the angle you're viewing 80 Bloor from. Walking/driving along Bloor you are more likely to see the wave in the balconies if they face Bloor St, as the sides will for a large part be blocked from line of sight by other tall buildings close to it.
That being said, it get your point and would be happy with the design either way.

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by The_Architect

Because the side with the curtainwall glass facing the main street makes it look like much more professional of a building, and much more clean, instead of aA condo number 42.

You can't honestly look at those renderings with a straight face and say that the balcony side will look as crisp and good on Bloor as the curtainwall side would.

The curtainwall side certainly looks better than the balcony side, but I'm not sure why rotating it is such a big deal. Given the height of this thing, the curtainwall sides will still be highly visible. In fact, I'd guess that they'll be even more visible than before as most people will look at this building walking or driving from the east or west on Bloor, rather than standing right in front of ithe tower and looking straight up.

[WhipperSnapper]

Rotating it is a bigger deal than you're giving credit for. The vision curtain wall has being replaced with spandrel panels of glass or metal or possibly even concrete. The question remains if the first renderings were even possible.

What it doesn't change is the design which is not nearly as exciting as depicted in the original renderings. In fact, the design is an overbearing hulk that needs to be drastically reworked.

[Ramako]

I hope not. I like my buildings being overbearing hulks. We've got enough slender point towers.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by yaletown_fella

Mother of G-d!!

This could possibly be the best Yorkville design since Stern's One Saint Thomas.

Normally I like it when boxy designs do something more exciting with irregular patterns but this is kind of tacky. I don't think it will age well.

[Chadillaccc]

I liked it the other way for sure, but it's still not too bad imo. It does change the aesthetic significantly though.

[O-tacular]

Originally Posted by feepa

Edmonton - 71 Stories








http://www.edmontonjournal.com/busin...dmontonjournal

I like it up close but not from afar. I'm not sure if it just looks out of place with nothing else even near its height, or if it's too clunky. I really like the open skygardens and the weird sloped glass at the base. I'm not crazy about the sloped crown though. EAP does something similar but it somehow elongates it and makes it more elegant. On this proposal I find it does the opposite.

[urbandreamer]

re: 80 Bloor. Surely neighbouring property owners want the blank faces to ensure they can retain future redevelopment rights themselves? Eg: the Harry Rosen store is dated and ugly and could easily become a future 55s tower.

The Edmonton proposal is probably just another pipe dream ... it's a mess currently. Redesign.

[caltrane74]

Side by side comparison



I wonder what the point of rotating the building was?

My answer posted a minute before I could finish my post...

Originally Posted by urbandreamer

re: 80 Bloor. Surely neighbouring property owners want the blank faces to ensure they can retain future redevelopment rights themselves? Eg: the Harry Rosen store is dated and ugly and could easily become a future 55s tower.
.

[LeftCoaster]

That and it makes more sense having the balconies face south towards the skyline/lake view rather than east/west.

All in all it makes much more sense to have the balconies face south from a functional perspective, however it does compromise the design aesthetic a bit.

[caltrane74]

Again, the building currently on the site of the proposed tower.

[craner]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

80 Bloor is gorgeous and very much in the New York City mold.

The design is crisp and clean, best of all its tall as hell.

I'm with Cal on this one

[Coldrsx]

The Edmontonian place into the skyline..


(http://i.imgur.com/3W88BlC.png)

[Wooster]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

The Edmontonian place into the skyline..


(http://i.imgur.com/3W88BlC.png)

Would dominate much like Devon in OKC.

[TallBob]

^^That's just what I was thinking! ^^ But damn, I still like it!

[koops65]

Saying the Edmontonian is too tall means nothing, eventually other taller towers will join it...

[Travis007]

Latest rendering for Canderel's 460 Yonge development. From G+C:

http://www.gc-architects.com/highrise/youngegrenville.html#sthash.wBWsostf.dpbs

[TallBob]

Referring to the Edmontonian: I made reference to when the John Hancock tower was built along Michigan Ave. in 1968. There wasn't a building taller than 400' feet north of the river.... and then Pops this 1127' monster. It didn't destroy Mich. Ave. Today, it's one of the premier streets & shopping districts in the world! Nothing wrong with "reaching for the sky" so-to-speak! Edmonton isn't Chicago.... I'm just saying.

[caltrane74]

Also Toronto, when TD Centre went up, there was nothing taller than 300 or 400 feet and then bam! 700 feet.

I guess you got start somewhere. Same for Edmonton.

[craner]

Originally Posted by Coldrsx

The Edmontonian place into the skyline..


(http://i.imgur.com/3W88BlC.png)

That's the wrong location no?
Looks like it's on the 102 St. Centre location. Shouldn't it be in front of Epcor?.