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

fanoftoronto said:
If I remember correctly, the reason the CTBUH considers spires as part of the height of the tower is that the spires are part of the architectural design of the build and as such will not change. Antennas, on the other hand, can be taken down or replaced by taller or shorter antennas making the height of the building ever-changing.

I would vote to use the height including the spire as the height in the UT forums due to the above reason - 374m / 376m depending on what is defined as grade.

To give an extreme hypothetical, imagine the spire on this building was replaced with a 1 sq-m floorspace room with a height of 77 metres. Technically, the roof height would be 374 metres, but this room would serve absolutely no purpose (other than maybe housing a really tall ladder 🤣 ). So, why would that hypothetical room qualify as "roof" height, but an architectural spire not qualify to use as the total height of the building?

Horrible MS Word sketch of this hypothetical 77m tall room below!
View attachment 346663
Just my two cents.

Also, just pointing out that the "roof" height of the CN Tower is listed as 457m. I'll fight anyone who says this is the actual height of the CN Tower!! Hahahaha. The CN Tower is 553.3m tall, so help me god! 🤣🤣🤣🤣
Click to expand...
I understand what your saying, but I just think adding a spire on top of a building to increase its height is kinda cheating. The CN tower isn't classified as a building because it's essentially just a big spire with some floors here and there.
 
I think the 374/376 metre spire height should be used, because that's the official height of the tower. On the SSP diagrams 3 sortable height criteria are used; antenna, spire and roof. Why not alter your program to do the same?
 
Last edited:
SkyscraperFan1994 said:
I understand what your saying, but I just think adding a spire on top of a building to increase its height is kinda cheating. The CN tower isn't classified as a building because it's essentially just a big spire with some floors here and there.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I would use "cheating", rather more "faux" instead. As it's part of the building folks can't work or reside in properly, and it should be really stated as such within the official measurements.

...it's the same as if someone who is about 2 m sporting a 1 m fro really. Does that make them 3 m tall?
 
ciceror said:
Observation deck is a good idea - I always felt the CN tower observation deck had one major problem - that when you stand in it and see the city, you can't see Toronto's most defining feature, the CN tower itself
Click to expand...
That's right we need another towering structure with an observation deck. To get a view of CN Tower etc from another angle. This proposed observation deck is not high enough to do the job. As seen in FutureModelTo photo in the previous pages. That's why the spire should become wider to hold an observation deck on the very top of it. Getting a good close birds eye view of financial area etc.
 
The Preservationist said:
Yep, went up when in opened. As I remember it was decorated in plush red carpet on floor and walls. Think it closed when Commerce court west opened its observation deck decorated in sapphire blue carpeting on floor and walls. I've been recently told it closed when the CN Tower opened. I remember going up to the top of 1st Canada Place to the top floor during lunch hour when it opened but to my horror executive offices and no observation deck. I did not get out of the elevator!
Click to expand...
The TD Tower had both a restaurant and a cocktail lounge on the top (below the observation deck?) when it opened. I can remember my father taking me to dinner there in 1970 when I started university. The restaurant was simply called "The 54th" because it was on the 54th floor. The lounge was called "The Safari Room", with lots of leopard skin upholstry, and where a wink from my dad got me a martini. The restaurant featured high-end French haute cuisine. I remember we had pheasant under glass and baked Alaska for dessert. The dining room didn't rotate, but it was still impressive (even if Toronto didn't offer much to see at the time).
 
cd concept said:
That's right we need another towering structure with an observation deck. To get a view of CN Tower etc from another angle. This proposed observation deck is not high enough to do the job. As seen in FutureModelTo photo in the previous pages. That's why the spire should become wider to hold an observation deck on the very top of it. Getting a good close birds eye view of financial area etc.
Click to expand...

I don't think that's the case. The view to the North isn't all that great, but to the South and especially the West the views will be spectacular:

Toronto Model 09-05-21 Looking North.png


Toronto Model 09-05-21 Looking South.png


Toronto Model 09-05-21 Looking West.png



I'm still working on the building and atrium but here is a sneak peek:

Toronto Model 09-05-21 191 Bay.png
 
Last edited:
So cool to see @Koops65! I love seeing vantage points in your model from these types of perspectives.

I also personally kind of really like how the observation deck is within the buildings and maybe even prefer it instead just being overtop of them looking down. This may have a very cool feeling of being amid the forest of skyscrapers of the city. And it isn't likely to have any massive buildings be built right in front of it in the near future or fully blocking the view of the CN Tower (unless Rogers Centre gets redeveloped into big towers), so it could have quite an compelling panoramic vantage point for some time to come.

The view straight through to Humber Bay is super cool as well — seeing the depth of the city from within this core of buildings with massive buildings on either side framing the view.

The buildings feel very dramatic from this perspective and their size I think maybe carries more awe when you see them from this angle amid them, you feel their imposing size vs. if you are looking top down onto them as with the CN Tower and they seem smaller by comparison. I'm very excited for this observation deck and very much hope it's public access (it is right?) and not that expensive. Likely will become a frequent site of UrbanToronto photographers for all the new vantage points this offers, and especially cool to have this kind of perspective on the city from within the city as a place for us building enthusiasts who don't ourselves live in a tower with a view to gaze out at to go to and get some views in haha
 
Last edited:
Always love your dedication in showing your work to the public Koops ! But I'm talking having an observation deck at the height of CN Tower's observation deck from this spire. This spire's length is about the same height as that at about 375m. If you can create that hieght viewing the financial district and CN Tower would be great to show the public. thanks !!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
urbanexplorer said:
I don’t think you can have an observation deck in a spire, that’s not really how spires work to my knowledge. Youd have to have an actual floor at that level, so kind of a moot point.
Click to expand...
I was thinking more like creating a small one medium style look out tower . Like they have in Vancouver called the Look Out Tower at Harbour Center instead of a spire.
 
No height adjustment for this project? The database also hasn't been changed, it's still at 301.74 metres.
 
Koops65 said:
No height adjustment for this project? The database also hasn't been changed, it's still at 301.74 metres.
Click to expand...
I understand that you are showing the view at the height of the top of the building. But I was wondering how the view would look if it was at the top of the antenna height on your photo shots. It would probably have a clearer view of the financial district. But thanks anyway for imput on the photos.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top