Toronto Bay Adelaide Centre | 217.92m | 51s | Brookfield | KPMB

[Roy G Biv]

Excited to see it start to rise.

Why? It's an uninspiring box.

 

[Ramako]

Why? It's an uninspiring box.

Well as far as boxes go, it should be a high quality box. Plus it's always good to see major office construction in the core.

The podium facing Yonge looks like it will engage the street very well. I'm also looking forward to seeing how this building will bookend Arnell Plaza.

 

[Roy G Biv]

Well as far as boxes go, it should be a high quality box. Plus it's always good to see major office construction in the core.

The podium facing Yonge looks like it will engage the street very well. I'm also looking forward to seeing how this building will bookend Arnell Plaza.

It's unfortunate that our expectations have become so low. We have the richest developers and GCs in North America right now, thanks to the boom. This building will house big-time financial services firms and it's right downtown on prime real-estate. In a real world class city, there would be an expectation for this kind of building to make a splash on the world-stage, architecturally; all the conditions are right. Instead, there is no expectation to give back to the city, so every decision is based on maximizing leasable floor-space and ROI. KPMB probably could have done something great in this space.

I was just in London and met with people involved in the contruction of The Shard. Throughout the entire process of planning and building, the project team had a theme... a vision... an underlying desire to build something great. They had to overcome enormous challenges to do so, but they weere aided by the fact that their vision had buy-in from all stakeholders.

 

[Ramako]

It's unfortunate that our expectations have become so low. We have the richest developers and GCs in North America right now, thanks to the boom. This building will house big-time financial services firms and it's right downtown on prime real-estate. In a real world class city, there would be an expectation for this kind of building to make a splash on the world-stage, architecturally; all the conditions are right. Instead, there is no expectation to give back to the city, so every decision is based on maximizing leasable floor-space and ROI. KPMB probably could have done something great in this space.

I was just in London and met with people involved in the contruction of The Shard. Throughout the entire process of planning and building, the project team had a theme... a vision... an underlying desire to build something great. They had to overcome enormous challenges to do so, but they weere aided by the fact that their vision had buy-in from all stakeholders.

The Shard is the tallest tower in the EU and was very much intended to be a show-piece. It literally stands apart in London's skyline. I think it's disingenuous to compare the Shard to this relatively minor tower (which will be only the 20th tallest tower in Toronto including those U/C) and which won't have the height or the position to make any impact on the skyline.

Regardless, if you look at Brookfield's track record, they tend to build very conservative, boxy designs in almost every city in which they operate. Brookfield Place in Calgary, Manhattan West in New York, 100 Bishopsgate in London... save for a couple odd angles here or there, they're all more or less stark boxes. That's just how Brookfield rolls. In fact, I recall someone mentioning something along the lines that Brookfield gave KPMB leeway to approach them with an interesting design here, and it was KPMB, not the developer, that advocated for the minimalistic box. Supposedly this design wasn't chosen for financial reasons but for architectural reasons. Bruce Kuwabara is a modernist to his core, and he loves simple boxes. It's evident in many of KPMB's office projects. Many don't share his taste in architecture, but it's certainly a valid one, and the denizens of a city that boasts the likes of TD Centre and Commerce Court West should be able to appreciate that.

 

[maestro]

What makes you think developers aren't building to suit the needs of potential tenants? In my experience in dealing with some major leaseholders in the city, they demand large highly efficient floor plates to cram as many hotelling/contractor "desks" into the space.

 

[Ramako]

What makes you think developers aren't building to suit the needs of potential tenants? In my experience in dealing with some major leaseholders in the city, they demand large highly efficient floor plates to cram as many hotelling/contractor "desks" into the space.

That's absolutely a factor as well. I'm sure if Deloitte wanting significant changes to the design, Brookfield would have been willing to accommodate them, but unfortunately the big accounting firms don't seem particularly keen on garish headquarters.

 

[Roy G Biv]

The Shard is the tallest tower in the EU and was very much intended to be a show-piece. It literally stands apart in London's skyline. I think it's disingenuous to compare the Shard to this relatively minor tower (which will be only the 20th tallest tower in Toronto including those U/C) and which won't have the height or the position to make any impact on the skyline.

Ok, if you don't like The Shard example look at 20 Fenchurch instead. Sky-line impact is an excuse. Interesting architecture will create its own impact, even if you have to see it in person to appreciate it. Other than the L Tower and maybe 1 Bloor East, buildings with sky-line impact (Four Seasons, Aura etc) aren't pulling their weight. What makes this project prime are the tenants and the money involved. You would think the rents would be high enough to allow for higher costs on the construction side.

Regardless, if you look at Brookfield's track record, they tend to build very conservative, boxy designs in almost every city in which they operate. Brookfield Place in Calgary, Manhattan West in New York, 100 Bishopsgate in London... save for a couple odd angles here or there, they're all more or less stark boxes. That's just how Brookfield rolls.

Translation: Brookfield plays it safe to ensure they continue making ridiculous amounts of money. ROI-based design.

Supposedly this design wasn't chosen for financial reasons but for architectural reasons. Bruce Kuwabara is a modernist to his core, and he loves simple boxes. It's evident in many of KPMB's office projects. Many don't share his taste in architecture, but it's certainly a valid one, and the denizens of a city that boasts the likes of TD Centre and Commerce Court West should be able to appreciate that.

This building could be modernist/interesting instead of modernist/boring. However, the former would cost more money. Architects work within constraints put on them by their clients, and it would be naive to suggest that Kuwabara's design is was only constrained by his own mind.

Back to my original point: I don't get why we should be excited to see this one go up, other than the fact that it is adding density to an area in need of density. It's not like we don't have a lot of tall buildings going up in this city.

 

[Ramako]

Ok, if you don't like The Shard example look at 20 Fenchurch instead. Sky-line impact is an excuse. Interesting architecture will create its own impact, even if you have to see it in person to appreciate it. Other than the L Tower and maybe 1 Bloor East, buildings with sky-line impact (Four Seasons, Aura etc) aren't pulling their weight. What makes this project prime are the tenants and the money involved. You would think the rents would be high enough to allow for higher costs on the construction side.

20 Fenchurch is still a very high-profile project. You can see it easily from all over the south bank. And generally speaking, most of London's new skyscrapers are high profile projects given the fact that they're just now building a skyline. Every project makes a massive impact. Older, larger skylines are full of low-profile solid office boxes; Chicago and Manhattan included.

This building could be modernist/interesting instead of modernist/boring. However, the former would cost more money. Architects work within constraints put on them by their clients, and it would be naive to suggest that Kuwabara's design is was only constrained by his own mind.

I have no doubt that Kuwabara had to work within certain constraints imposed on him by Brookfield, but I don't think he came close to pushing up against the limits of those constraints.

 

[khris]

Well as far as boxes go, it should be a high quality box. Plus it's always good to see major office construction in the core.

The podium facing Yonge looks like it will engage the street very well. I'm also looking forward to seeing how this building will bookend Arnell Plaza.

I can't wait to see how Arnell Plaza will look. It's one of my favourite places to be. Right in the middle of everything with amazing views when you look up.

 

[Conrad Black]

Back to my original point: I don't get why we should be excited to see this one go up, other than the fact that it is adding density to an area in need of density. It's not like we don't have a lot of tall buildings going up in this city.

Because it fixes a major gash in the downtown urban fabric. That block was a dead zone for almost two decades. Bay Adelaide West repaired part of the block. This finishes it. Just for that I'm happy. The added density, more office space and look are a bonus. It isn't The Shard but it isn't a disaster either. I actually quite like it. To me these are equivalent to the Sun Life buildings on University.

 

[AndreaPalladio]

Unless something has changed recently, I think the Shard is empty. Only a spectacularly rich individual owner, which it is lucky to have and needed in order to be completed, could sit on an unperforming, or at best, underperforming, asset.

 

[Torontovibe]

That's absolutely a factor as well. I'm sure if Deloitte wanting significant changes to the design, Brookfield would have been willing to accommodate them, but unfortunately the big accounting firms don't seem particularly keen on garish headquarters.

Does beautiful = garish? (just wondering)

 

[travis3000]

The Shard is the tallest tower in the EU and was very much intended to be a show-piece. It literally stands apart in London's skyline. I think it's disingenuous to compare the Shard to this relatively minor tower (which will be only the 20th tallest tower in Toronto including those U/C) and which won't have the height or the position to make any impact on the skyline.

Regardless, if you look at Brookfield's track record, they tend to build very conservative, boxy designs in almost every city in which they operate. Brookfield Place in Calgary, Manhattan West in New York, 100 Bishopsgate in London... save for a couple odd angles here or there, they're all more or less stark boxes. That's just how Brookfield rolls. In fact, I recall someone mentioning something along the lines that Brookfield gave KPMB leeway to approach them with an interesting design here, and it was KPMB, not the developer, that advocated for the minimalistic box. Supposedly this design wasn't chosen for financial reasons but for architectural reasons. Bruce Kuwabara is a modernist to his core, and he loves simple boxes. It's evident in many of KPMB's office projects. Many don't share his taste in architecture, but it's certainly a valid one, and the denizens of a city that boasts the likes of TD Centre and Commerce Court West should be able to appreciate that.

Well said. Agree with all of that.

 

[devjohnson]

I don't mind the simplistic "boxes" here. I think once the second phase is built, the two towers will compliment each other very nicely. Adds density too!

 

[devjohnson]

First few floors starting to take shape