Discussion in 'Design and Architectural Style' started by gei, May 9, 2011.
oh em gee...
I recall reading that when the CN Tower was being planned, the engineers involved calculated the "fall" radius should the tower collapse, be blown up, or have an airliner crash into it (it was designed to withstand a direct hit from a Boeing 707). With this development, I'm wondering if the puke "blast radius" has been taken into account...
Sign me up!!
$175... hmm ok, I'll do it. Once.
Imagine the photographs we could get by walking around this area without any glass or wire mesh in the way? Not me though!
It's good to see the CN tower continuing to add new attractions to enhance the visit in the past few years.
The attraction is a bit gimmicky, but that's not so bad as the structural add-ons.
Though the attraction looks like a blast to participate in, I don't like the look of the project because of the way it will further mess with the tower's profile. Although the look of the tower has been cluttered with heaps of extra communications hardware for years now, I don't like seeing it tampered with this blatantly - or permanently.
I would have rather seen them put high glass wall around the parapet and created a new open-roofed observation deck. Anything with less visual intrusion, then messing with this landmark.
Once again, I couldn't agree more with you. It's been about three weeks now since the structural bars have become visible from my POV, I really noticed it from the Spadina & College area last week with the way that the sun was hitting it at the time of day I was there. Anyway, what's done is done. Next up: the bottom half of the structure needs a facelift. All the patching that has been done over the years is really looking bad.
Somehow I doubt they'd let people carry anything that could accidentally fall such as a camera.
"the look of the tower has been cluttered with heaps of extra communications hardware for years now,"
You do know that the CN tower was built as a communications transmission tower first and foremost and the observation deck, etc were the extra 'add-ons', right?
It's very "Toronto" of us to ruin the outside of our most recognizable landmark so that we can indulge in some cheap thrill...except that $175 isn't exactly cheap.
I'm with those who lament the defacement of this landmark. I saw some of the structural work up over the weekend and thought that it was wearing a crown of thorns. A shame, because Toronto has the most elegant of these 1960s/1970s observation/communication towers (though I think only Seattle has one nearly as interesting).
The problem is that if (and likely when) this thrill ride lost its novelty, we will likely be stuck with the beams. Interestingly the owners of the CN Tower also own the image of the tower, meaning that vendors can't legally parade with cheap trinkets at the base as they do at the Eiffel Tower. Since it now has this addition, is the more elegant original free for the selling?
They could turn the top of the tower into a mini six flags
Ssshhhhhh!!! People read this board
The two towers that currently feature this walk (Auckland's Sky Tower and the Macau Tower) were designed fro the start to have this walk. The walkway is very nicely incorporated into their designs as a ring around the observation deck. No unsightly supports needed.