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

The tower specifically:

Let's face it this is a(n) HP fail (doesn't happen often). Any 2nd year arch student (and probably a few UT folks) could draw this in an hour.

I get the notion that there's a bit of homage (simplicity) to Pei's CIBC at King and Bay, but the sacrifice of the other Pei buildings screams "do better Mr. Pontarini". Starting to think a re-work of the original ill-shaped and proportioned design first shown has more merit.

But really, a project this size deserves some serious arch chops. If it's going to happen then make it great. It will fit in eventually.

P.S. the 1st shot of the UT slideshow shows one occupied floor. Serves them right ;-)
The problem with the proposal is not the architect or architecture but with the site planning and basic massing of the proposal. Any new replacement tower on the east side of the site should not have been allowed to exceed the existing footprint. End of story. The economic arguments are irrelevant in this case. Heritage and urban design principles should have triumphed.
 
The tower specifically:

Let's face it this is a(n) HP fail (doesn't happen often). Any 2nd year arch student (and probably a few UT folks) could draw this in an hour.

I get the notion that there's a bit of homage (simplicity) to Pei's CIBC at King and Bay, but the sacrifice of the other Pei buildings screams "do better Mr. Pontarini". Starting to think a re-work of the original ill-shaped and proportioned design first shown has more merit.

But really, a project this size deserves some serious arch chops. If it's going to happen then make it great. It will fit in eventually.

P.S. the 1st shot of the UT slideshow shows one occupied floor. Serves them right ;-)
I do not understand this critique. Can you elaborate?
 
Well it's too late but the gist: this tower is so unin(spired) given what will be sacrificed...

30327-122011.jpeg



I'd almost prefer another look/revision at this (much discussed, not liked much)....

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/default/files/images/projects/30327/30327-104321.jpeg

Or..... something like this (HP):

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/default/files/images/projects/6918/6918-100984.jpeg

But since the barn door has closed, we'll say this is a lament rather than an "elaboration". A waste of time but hey it's free and u asked.
 
The older rendering does look much better than the new one. Just by looking at the first jpeg photo that 3dementia has put out above . From the angle looking up it really shows the corner detailed windows of the building !
 
Zoning was approved by Council. Here's the s.37 rundown:

5.a) Contributions to be allocated towards the following:

i. A contribution of $3,271,000, either as a cash contribution, or secured by way of a letter of credit, or combination thereof, shall be directed towards public streetscape improvements adjacent to the subject site as shown on the Landscape Plans by Claude Cormier + Associes dated March 13, 2019, to the satisfaction of the Chief Planner and Executive Director, City Planning, payable prior to the issuance of the first above grade permit;

ii. A cash contribution of $1,829,000 to be allocated to public streetscape improvements within the Financial District, of which the boundaries are established on Map 41-2 of the Downtown Plan, payable prior to the issuance of the first above grade permit;

iii. A cash contribution of $12,400,000, payable prior to the issuance of the first above grade, to be directed as follows:

A. $8,000,000 towards the provision of new affordable housing within Ward 13, to be directed to the Capital Revolving Fund for Affordable Housing, in consultation with the Ward Councillor; and

B. $4,400,000 towards the provision of local streetscape improvements within Ward 13, in consultation with the Ward Councillor; and

iv. A contribution of a minimum value of $1,000,000 for on-site public art, through the preparation of a public art plan, in accordance with City Planning's Percent for Public Art process, and with approval from City Council. Alternatively, if it is determined that the public art will not be on-site, the owner will contribute the $1,000,000 to the City's capital budget for Public Art off-site to be commissioned by the City. The owner agrees to advise the City, in writing of its chosen option prior to the issuance of the first building permit.

 
Well it's too late but the gist: this tower is so unin(spired) given what will be sacrificed...

30327-122011.jpeg



I'd almost prefer another look/revision at this (much discussed, not liked much)....

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/default/files/images/projects/30327/30327-104321.jpeg

Or..... something like this (HP):

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/default/files/images/projects/6918/6918-100984.jpeg

But since the barn door has closed, we'll say this is a lament rather than an "elaboration". A waste of time but hey it's free and u asked.

i dunno dude, that is a pretty nice tower...any more inspired and it wouldn't fit in to the skyline properly.
 
I’d prefer something outlandish and garish to be honest. We are lacking that.

Kind of. CN Tower is pretty kooky...imo. Kooky enough...not as kooky as Shanghai's TV tower but NYC doesnt have anything as kooky as the CN Tower and its a much bigger city.

I think it would be a mistake to build something kooky that is tall, CN Tower should stay the focal point of skyline...not enough room for more for now.
 
Im a bit skeptical this will be built anytime soon. Between 16 York (880k), Bay Adelaide N (800k), CIBC Square (2.7 million), the Well (800k) and 160 Front (1.2 million) we have over 6.3 million square feet of new space on the way in the core.

Plus in addition to those u/c there are others searching for tenants like The HUB at 1.3 million square feet and Union Centre at 1.7 million square feet. I just don't see any big companies left that could fill such big buildings. Could be a long time, if at all, if this tower or the other two go ahead.
 

Back
Top