50 Bloor Street West | 230m | 70s | Morguard Corporation | Pellow + Associates

Ramako

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
4,626
Reaction score
718
Location
Toronto, ON
This looks less than adequate.
First off, that's part of an Eaton Centre-style shopping mall, not a skyscraper. I've never seen an enclosed shopping mall that acknowledged the outside world or pedestrian experience.

Secondly, Copley Place was built in the early 1980's. Somehow, I don't think the architect for 50 Bloor is going to suddenly decide to ditch the neo-modren glassy aesthetic of our era and run with retro brutalism.
 
Last edited:

Ramako

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
4,626
Reaction score
718
Location
Toronto, ON
I agree that Yorkville is different from those cities, that's why I said this site is appropriate for a skyscraper. But Yorkville is still very close to low rise neighbourhoods and the placement of new skyscrapers has to be carefully evaluated.

Cities like Paris and Madrid do have skyscrapers but they're generally on the edge of the city instead of in established neighbourhoods. Their central cores are predominantly low and midrise, much more so than Toronto. They were examples off the top of my head to show that brushing off opposition to a skyscraper with "Tall buildings are in cities. Don't like it, move out to the country" is childish and simplistic at best. If you did the same thing with an 80 storey skyscraper in central Madrid you'd get laughed out of the room.
Unlike Paris and Madrid, Toronto's central core is not predominately low and midrise. North American cities have totally different population distributions than European cities, and very tall skyscrapers are ubiquitous within the central cores of North America cities, of which we are one. Conflating the two contexts is disingenuous.
 

buildup

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
292
I would. So will all of my neighbours. Let's build this beside your place and see how you feel.
Lame.

If this was to be built "beside my place", assuming I lived right on Bloor, I wouldn't complain. As it is, I live 2 1/2 blocks away and I am happy to see this coming.

I'm trying to figure where "all your neighbours" live who are apparently in the shadow of this proposal. Is there some farm hidden from view?
 
G

gabe

Guest
I would. So will all of my neighbours. Let's build this beside your place and see how you feel.
If you have a fear of tall buildings living in Toronto probably isn't for you. As space becomes more limited buildings are only going to get taller over the next 20 years.
 

jn_12

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
1
Street level is going to be a modern, luxury department store. I don't think you need to worry about whether it will be a positive addition to the pedestrian experience.
Given the number of high-rise buildings in this city that don't contribute positively to the public realm, I think I have a good reason to have concerns. But we'll wait and see. I guess I just find it funny that people care more about the 83rd floor than the 1st.
 
Last edited:

Ramako

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
4,626
Reaction score
718
Location
Toronto, ON
Given the number of high-rise buildings in this city that don't contribute positively to the public realm, I think I have a good reason to have concerns. But we'll wait and see. I guess I just find it funny that people care more about the 83rd floor than the 1st.
Well we know nothing about this project either way, aside from the fact that it's going to be 83 storeys and contain a Holt's at street level. So it's kind of hard not to be excited about the height while being at least cautiously optimistic about the street level. But why get pre-emptively worked up over the street level when there haven't even been any drawings released?
 

Platform 27

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 24, 2009
Messages
756
Reaction score
29
To recap some of the architectural speculation twists and turns (that mostly played out of over on the Cumberland Terrace thread):

1) Some time ago, @blacktowertv tweets that Oxford had something big planned for Yonge and Bloor involving Will Alsop
2) Shortly thereafter, potentially following blacktower's lead, Matthew Slutsky of BuzzBuzzHome puts 100 storey Alsop on the table.
3) On March 12, Ramako posts to the Cumberland Terrace thread (adjacent site, also an Oxford project) he's heard something "juicy" is afoot that he strongly suspects is for that site
3) On March 13, p5connex chimes in and says that for Cumberland, it will be a "certain UK architect making his Canadian residential debut" who like "multi-coloured stacks"
4) People put two and two together, myself included, and speculate that the plan for Cumberland is Alsop. Who, to be fair, is British and likes colour
5) Ramako says no, for Cumberland, unless something's changed, he's heard "a different, albeit international architect"
6) Just like before, p5connex again pops in a few posts later and says not Allsop, it's Sir "x", British architect known for colour and mechanical style, and what he saw was a 42s tower proposal.
7) Majority of speculation turns to Sir Richard Rogers (or more likely, various underlings at his firm) for Cumberland
8) The 83st application for Holt's breaks
9) Ramako: "If Oxford is indeed the developer here, then I think I know who the architect might be. I had previously suspected that Cumberland Terrace was the site to which my info related, but now I'm thinking that it's the Holt's site, especially given the size of the proposal. If my suspicions are right, UT is going to lose its shit."

Anyway, assuming that most of the input rumours were credible and there haven't been some baseless fanboyism injected into the information flow at some point (not suggesting either of the two posters I named would be those people, but it's possible earlier sources in the chain were), we have at least the below pair of possibilities:

A) Ramako and p5 had both been speaking about Cumberland the whole time. That project is indeed likely a Richard Rogers mecha-colour suitably cool statement. The Allsop rumour therefore needs a big Oxford Yorkville proposal to match with, and that could be 50 Bloor
B) Ramako and p5 have been speaking to different projects the whole time. p5 is right about Cumberland being a Richard Rogers mechacolour design statement. Ramako has been trying to match info that was always about 50 Bloor to a specific site, and so we can deduce it's *not* Will Alsop, but another international architect.

Alternately, the posters in question could just tell us what they knew and for where, but where would be the fun in that?
 

Ramako

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
4,626
Reaction score
718
Location
Toronto, ON
This might help clear things up: After following up with my source, it turns out 50 Bloor is not the site that my info relates to. All I know is (1) the architectural firms involved, (2) that it's going to be large and (3) that it's not yet a sure thing. I have no idea about the location.
 

Mongo

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,311
Reaction score
170
This might help clear things up: After following up with my source, it turns out 50 Bloor is not the site that my info relates to. All I know is (1) the architectural firms involved, (2) that it's going to be large and (3) that it's not yet a sure thing. I have no idea about the location.
To me, this is good news. It means that there is yet another massive, possibly-iconic tower in the works, beyond the ones we know about. It does sound like it is different from the Cumberland Terrace project, whoever the architect for that one is (quite possibly Richard Rogers). But that still leaves a multitude of potential sites to choose from.
 

jn_12

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 27, 2007
Messages
2,081
Reaction score
1
Well we know nothing about this project either way, aside from the fact that it's going to be 83 storeys and contain a Holt's at street level. So it's kind of hard not to be excited about the height while being at least cautiously optimistic about the street level. But why get pre-emptively worked up over the street level when there haven't even been any drawings released?
I agree, hence I said "we'll wait and see." But I just thought it was worth chiming in on an aspect of the building that everyone has and will overlook. Really, my comment about street level could be pre-emptively made in almost every thread on this site. I just find it's an often ignored aspect of these developments.
 

buildup

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 26, 2007
Messages
2,208
Reaction score
292
Given the number of high-rise buildings in this city that don't contribute positively to the public realm, I think I have a good reason to have concerns. But we'll wait and see. I guess I just find it funny that people care more about the 83rd floor than the 1st.
Its surprising the demands we put on high-rises to be everything for everyone. Is a tall residential tower in a residential area supposed to somehow include and ensure success of retail at street level? Does every block in Etobicoke have a Five Thieves? I you look at many old iconic towers - residential and commercial - most do not have thriving retail because that wasn't their purpose or location. That applies to New York and Chicago too.

If the street has thriving retail, as Bloor does, then obviously its going to make the most of it and there is no need to fret. But its unreasonable to expect every Cityplace or SouthCore tower to have a Whole Foods, Nieman Marcus, Indigo, Famous Players, Ashley's, Prius dealership, or 4 star restaurant...much as it might please us.
 

khristopher

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
8,561
Reaction score
368
Location
Toronto, ON
Actually the race would be when the application gets submitted and when the guidelines get approved. Once an application is submitted it's evaluated based on the policy in place on that day, and future changes in policy don't affect it. And even if the guidelines were approved by Council, they do have the power to approve something that doesn't entirely conform to it.


Wow, I didn't realize that Paris wasn't a city. Apparently Madrid and St. Petersburg aren't either. They had me fooled all this time!

I agree that 50 Bloor is perfectly appropriate for an 80+ storey building. But the argument that cities automatically equal skyscrapers and if you don't like a proposal you should move the the country is ridiculous.
Toronto is a modern city compared to your examples. You know the difference, so I'm not sure why you bothered to even point these examples out.
 

Top