Toronto 191 Bay | 301.74m | 64s | QuadReal | Hariri Pontarini

[Automation Gallery]

Sorry been there seen it

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Evidently you haven't - otherwise you wouldn't have said this

Oh well yeah maybe on December21, considering the distance i still find it hard to believe

 

[3Dementia]

If you need another "waste of time but pleasant distraction" then a future skyline might be just the thing the doctor ordered!

LOL - are you offering a commi$$ion? ... I'm not sure if I have a UT retirement package (no-one's contacted me) lol.

 

[3Dementia]

P.S. as for shadowing St. James..... c'mon even without reading the shadow studies common sense says the sun is south... max impact would be mid summer for 10 minutes in late afternoon. Winter = shadows.

 

[ADRM]

I'll take the shadow studies over "common sense."

 

[Big Daddy]

I'll take the shadow studies over "common sense."

To be honest, there is no "common sense" - and that includes the "Studies".

Who decides what degree of shadow is acceptable and at what point are shadows not acceptable?.

It's a big city with big buildings - there's going to be shadows. Reducing the height of a building by 5 or 6 floors doesn't eliminate shadows, it merely confines them to a particular area which is ridiculous because shadows don't stay in any particular area for very long, they move.

 

[ADRM]

To be honest, there is no "common sense" - and that includes the "Studies".

Who decides what degree of shadow is acceptable and at what point are shadows not acceptable?.

It's a big city with big buildings - there's going to be shadows. Reducing the height of a building by 5 or 6 floors doesn't eliminate shadows, it merely confines them to a particular area which is ridiculous because shadows don't stay in any particular area for very long, they move.

The post to which I was responding cast doubt on the accuracy of the findings of shadow studies, not the subjective interpretation thereof, which is why it was deserving of mild ridicule.

And, in practical terms, you're sort of mistaken; in many cases, especially in areas as dense as this part of the downtown core, making adjustments to the height, massing, or built form of a building can for practical purposes make shadows "disappear", insofar as a new shadow may fall on a place of interest that is already shadowed, rendering concerns over the new shadow moot.

 

[travis3000]

Who cares about shadows lets build this beast.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Heading to the Jan 25 DRP:

https://www.toronto.ca/wp-content/u...Design-DesignReviewPanel-Agenda-25Jan2018.pdf

AoD

 

[ptbotrmpfn]

To be honest, there is no "common sense" - and that includes the "Studies".

Who decides what degree of shadow is acceptable and at what point are shadows not acceptable?.

It's a big city with big buildings - there's going to be shadows. Reducing the height of a building by 5 or 6 floors doesn't eliminate shadows, it merely confines them to a particular area which is ridiculous because shadows don't stay in any particular area for very long, they move.

I agree fully with you, but with some in this crowd, your put down for even arguing that one. It’s hopeless. 5hey don’t get it.

 

[interchange42]

5ho doesn't get what @ptbotrmpfn? Some in this crowd foolishly cling to professional studies predicated upon accepted standards that are applied consistently across the city? Sounds like uncommon sense to me.

42

 

[Edward Skira]

From Claude Cormier's site
http://www.claudecormier.com/en/projet/commerce-court/

 

[Edward Skira]

And more:

 

[condovo]

Get rid of that entry pavilion or sink it below grade. It really clutters things up. Also, I find Cormier's landscaping plan disjointed and uninspired. Hopefully, it's still evolving.

 

[Hamiltonian]

Just purchase the remaining Yonge St properties and shift the building eastward please... please.