Toronto Scotiabank North Tower at Bay Adelaide Centre | 140.2m | 32s | Brookfield | KPMB

interchange42 said:
When I say standout architecture in regards to the EY Tower and Bay Park Centre, I mean that their exteriors stand out in comparison to the typical Toronto office box, nothing more. Recent examples of the box are One York, Telus House, the PwC Tower, Bay Adelaide, etc. Some of those a fine examples of boxes, but comparatively, EY and Bay Park stand out from them. I'm just glad that we are getting some new office towers that aren't simple boxes, and I am hoping that more firms looking for new build new HQs will consider more daring architecture. It's a simple wish for a couple steps forward.

42
Click to expand...

they are different from the last half dozen major towers to go up. Standout also implies they are better. The EY compromises in providing a boxy, repetitive floor plan within a crystalline form creates a confused look to the building.
 
EY is more complex than a mere box; most floors in it are more than a simple rectangle. That's not so much of a compromise as it is a step in the right direction in a city with enough mere boxes. Conversely, and despite the fact that it all be a better use of space, it does not appear that Bay Adelaide North will not add any architectural value to Toronto.

42
 
interchange42 said:
When I say standout architecture in regards to the EY Tower and Bay Park Centre, I mean that their exteriors stand out in comparison to the typical Toronto office box, nothing more. Recent examples of the box are One York, Telus House, the PwC Tower, Bay Adelaide, etc. Some of those a fine examples of boxes, but comparatively, EY and Bay Park stand out from them. I'm just glad that we are getting some new office towers that aren't simple boxes, and I am hoping that more firms looking for new build new HQs will consider more daring architecture. It's a simple wish for a couple steps forward.

42
Click to expand...

On the note of Bay Park Centre, Chris Wilkinson (Wilkinson+Eyre) discussed something interesting of this nature in an old presentation about conceiving its design in the early stages. "... they (the client) said we didn't want any curves or anything complicated, it has to be a simple building, but we want something special". I'm glad the firm was able to come up with a unique, and architecturally significant design to break up the otherwise monolithic footprints of the Bay Park Centre, but as with other recent office developments throughout the city, this isn't always the case. To me, this quote really sums up a lot of the design criteria expected by office developers around the city, hence, why we are left with many of these highly efficient boxes, the worst examples being in the south core district.

To me, I think we'll have more opportunities for design when site constraints become more limited (EY Tower), or when the opportunity for a truly large-scale mixed-use tower development arises.

The full video is here, which includes 4 case studies of office buildings in different countries. The discussion for Bay Park starts at around the 33 min mark.

 
Thanks @steveve - presumably said client was more willing to pay extra for the pillowed look (with the triangular, though repeated cladding units) that others weren't. Sadly really.

AoD
 
The thing that I think we are not appreciating here when we describe these buildings as just another glass box is that the clients are paying for differentiation, just not differentiation in the form of architectural expression like we want on this forum. The simple answer to the riddle of the glass box is that architectural expression just doesn't command the premium we want it to in our market for buildings. The flexible floor plans, environmental considerations, technologies and financial and technical considerations are where the money is. Maybe over time as more of our office buildings conform to contemporary demands differentiation in the form of architectural expression will command more of a premium.
 
EY is paying for architectural differentiation as is CIBC. There will always be companies interested in setting themselves apart that way, but not others. I'm just hoping that more will feel so inclined, hoping that the EY Tower will soon be making competitors envious, and eventually the same with the Bay Park Centre. Anyone moving into The Well and 160 Front Street West will also be able to Wall tall too.

42
 
Notice in our email today that half the food court is closing the end of this month, with the other half closing the end of July, in preparation for North Tower construction. Apparently they'll be relocating Timmy's, and keeping the Shoppers and PATH connection to HBC open through construction.
 
jcam said:
Notice in our email today that half the food court is closing the end of this month, with the other half closing the end of July, in preparation for North Tower construction. Apparently they'll be relocating Timmy's, and keeping the Shoppers and PATH connection to HBC open through construction.
Click to expand...
Whaaaaaaa???!!!

There's no Site Plan Application in to the City.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top