401 Bay Street (formerly Simpson Tower) | 143.86m | 33s | Cadillac Fairview | WZMH

adma

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
16,941
Reaction score
1,554
It's late Parkin BTW.

And somehow, it'd seem contrary to the Bonnie Brooks stylish spirit to muck it up. (Sort of like if Arcadian Court had remained in its shagadelic late 60s makeover form rather than its pomo re-makeover in the 90s, it might have been restored to *that* state.)
 

interchange42

Administrator
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
25,722
Reaction score
29,356
Location
by the Humber
I actually find the tower to look quite slim. The recessed exterior walls and exposed concrete columns up the side give it an almost anemic exterior form. The glass at the base also helps lighten its load at the bottom. Lastly, the top concrete mechanical portion acts as somewhat of a crown or head to top off the beauty.

I think its good geometric forms and consistently understated presence are what make it so appealing to me.

Wow - it's like I wrote that! Exactly how I feel about this building.

42
 

taal

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 19, 2007
Messages
6,693
Reaction score
176
Location
NYCC
Agreed completely, though I always thought it would be even more appealing if it were about another 10 stories higher ... not simply due to the height, rather the contrast it'd offer from the surroundings.
 

devjohnson

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 7, 2009
Messages
633
Reaction score
70
Not sure if these have been posted yet! While walking by the base of the tower this morning, I noticed renderings of the re-clad.

dr2ko0.jpg


25a1079.jpg
 

officedweller

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
2,981
Reaction score
1,228
WTF!

That is ugly!
(The lack of symmetry is brutal! (to a brutalist building, at that!)
If they are going to do that to the top - they need to remove the bulky structure up there.
Dare I ask - what does the other side look like?

Isn't there some sort of historical argument for preservation?

I can now see why Saks didn't want to be on this side of the building (despite the art deco block to the south).

Thanks for posting.
 

stjames2queenwest

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 9, 2014
Messages
2,788
Reaction score
2,842
Agreed, it looks great as is. I'm not generally a big brutalist fan but this is actually probably my favourite.

Are there structural integrity issues?
 

Canadian Chocho

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 13, 2013
Messages
371
Reaction score
440
Wasn't ever the biggest fan but I think it was just because of the overwhelming amount of concrete a Bay and Queen and I prefer the buildings across the street.

This however makes me appreciate it more. The top is just wrong.
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
31,674
Reaction score
24,873
Location
Toronto
Yuck. Others have already mentioned the issue with the tower treatment and the break in symmetry. Congrats, they have turned it into a Kirkor.

AoD
 

G.L.17

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2014
Messages
2,001
Reaction score
7,104
Location
Toronto
Wow, this tower and potentially 1200 Bay St get the call in the span of two days...it's as if developers want to purge the City of brutalist buildings.
 

Towered

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 24, 2007
Messages
7,215
Reaction score
6,707
Wow, I'm no fan of brutalism in general, but it's sad to see it getting the shaft so much lately...
 

Top