88 Scott St. (was 40 Scott St., Concert, 58s, P+S/IBI Group)

[yyzer]

It's gone from being an 'A minus' to maybe a 'C minus'......if these changes were mandated by the city, then the city is a jackass..

[CITY_LOVER]

This is why it's hard for some (like myself) to get too excited about renders for new projects in this city. It's likely that through the overall process of approval, construction, etc., a tower will become more boxy, less unique and likely more grey in color than what the initial render would have proposed. I'm not surprised at all by this latest render. I'm surprised, however, at how many people on this forum actually believed (or at least gave such an impression) that the render is valid enough to assume something like that would be built. In Toronto especially, until the building is substantially complete, you never know what significant changes a tower could have (and changes usually are for the worse).

[Grimace]

^^They have made a fairly small design change to the top of the building. People may or may not like it. But how is this an example of some problem endemic to Toronto? Buildings get redesigned from preliminary renders everywhere. There appear to be a number of changes to the proposal that are positive.

[Ramako]

I wonder if the design change was in response to the recommendations of the Design Review Panel: http://www.toronto.ca/planning/pdf/d...es_18oct11.pdf

Building Form and Articulation

Members were generally comfortable with the tower design, but did feel that it would benefit from a simpler, contemporary expression. Members were interested by the concept of relating various levels of the tower to neighbouring towers, however they felt that this neighbouring context would be likely to change over time. Subsequently, Panel was unconvinced by this concept, and encouraged the proponent to focus on making a grand and contemporary design that is unique to the subject building.

So is this a "grand and contemporary design" that is unique to the subject building?

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Ramsko:

The original finial was the most contemporary aspect of the design - and the statement clearly refers to the various levels that relate to the surrounding buildings instead. I found this whole "blame the city" thing amusing.

AoD

[Ramako]

Ramsko:

The original finial was the most contemporary aspect of the design - and the statement clearly refers to the various levels that relate to the surrounding buildings instead. I found this whole "blame the city" thing amusing.

AoD

I'm not trying to blame the city. I'm honestly trying to figure out Concert's motivation for making such a seemingly misguided revision. I don't think it's a foolish exercise to consider that the Design Review Panel may have had something to do with Concert's decision to... well, change the design.

Simply wanting to pack in more units at the top doesn't explain why they would alter the symmetry of the crown - the most prominent feature of the design. I'm just looking for some semblance of reason behind this decision.

[Nick.]

^^They have made a fairly small design change to the top of the building. People may or may not like it. But how is this an example of some problem endemic to Toronto? Buildings get redesigned from preliminary renders everywhere. There appear to be a number of changes to the proposal that are positive.

because this forum is so narrowly focused on toronto that any tiny problem is an epidemic unique to toronto and the entire city is going to hell in a handbasket and it's all [Architectural Firm I Don't Like]'s fault

[MikeOlivo-Moore]

What are the positive changes then? (As I didn't have a chance to read the entire document.) I was partial to the older top, wouldn't mind seeing a rendering with the new top before passing judgement.

[Ramako]

What are the positive changes then? (As I didn't have a chance to read the entire document.) I was partial to the older top, wouldn't mind seeing a rendering with the new top before passing judgement.

Among other things, they've added a significant amount of office and retail space to the podium and deleted the vehicular entrance that was originally planned to come off Wellington. They've also shifted the tower to the south making it almost flush with Wellington.

[bengaijin]

It seems the small, positive, programmatic changes made (more office/retail, changed vehicular entrance strategy) are completely unrelated to the big, gestural, and totally negative changes made. Change the crown, amplify the boxiness of the glazed boxes, and voila, you have transformed a handsome, conservative, and tastefully referential building into a stylistically amorphous turd. It's not like these changes do anything to bring the building into an edgy/contemporary category, they just pull it far enough away from its original style that it reads as being nothing in particular - just another clunker on the skyline. Put a quarter onion dome on it and call it a day.

[Redroom Studios]

wow, what a disappointment that they did such a hack job to the top of what was previously a very attractive design... its hard not to feel disillusioned following this whole "city building" thing.

[steveve]

the design has kinda been dumbed down... i like the old crown better..

[urbandreamer]

It's P+S, what ever could you expect?

[Ramako]

It's P+S, what ever could you expect?

You comment doesn't make sense. P+S was also responsible for the initial design of which most are lamenting the loss.

[urbandreamer]

^That's the point. I'm not lamenting anything as it was rubbish to begin with.