Toronto Concord Canada House | 231.97m | 74s | Concord Adex | Arcadis

Rascacielo said:
If we had a mountain near Toronto, we probably wouldn’t be able to have as many tall buildings, probably nothing over 250m, due to height restrictions to protect the mountain sightline (eg. Vancouver and Montreal)
Click to expand...
Thanks for your consolation! Come to think of it, mountains come with earthquakes too.
 
UrbanAffair said:
It's all so kitschy that I'd prefer it wasn't there at all. Are they calling this their art contribution? If so, it's a new low.
Click to expand...

Took the words out of my mouth. It's lipstick on a pig, a marketing trick that looks good on the brochures. Apart from a few decent buildings, Concord's legacy in CityPlace is mostly terrible and they should never be given a large site to develop again.
 
to-3-png.547125


^^ Very nice dream @cityspace ... I used to ski the little bumps of Blue Mountain and Collingwood would definitely rock with a Fuji. :)

Many moons ago I literally gave Vancouver's view cones our finger with my TorVan:

torvan copy.jpg
 
...I would be nervous of having Toronto located next to a volcano though. Or anywhere near shifting tectonic plates.
 
Rascacielo said:
I suppose Toronto was different 20 years ago. Almost everyone got excited over proposals for 40+ storey condos, no matter what they looked like. And the sight of so many of them rising out of the barren former railway lands (OK, there was a mini golf course) must have been a revelation ...
Click to expand...

20 years ago One King was under construction, the first new 150m tower in 10 years. I think 45 floor Pantageous Tower, completed a couple years before One King, was the tallest residential building since Manulife Centre in the 1970's.

40+ floors at that time was as rare for residential as a supertall is today.

Then Four Seasons, Trump, and Shangri-La were proposed and this forum debated which one would be built because surely there wasn't a market for 2 of them let alone all 3.
 
daptive said:
I read here that Kohn Pedersen Fox had a hand in designing some of the buildings but removed themselves after serious VE-ing, any chance you saved files of early design ideas?
Click to expand...
KPF were the original authors of Parade but had their name removed when Concord and Page & Steele's cost cutting became problematic (in their eyes).
 
Which says a lot about what we where stuck with for the ages. And not in any good way. /sigh
 
And yet KPF (as discussed last year) still has Concord Sky on their website despite the problematic V-Eing we've seen (they still use their older renderings).
Perhaps they'll remove Concord Sky once the first cladding appears? 🙃

https://www.kpf.com/project/concord-sky
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
...I would be nervous of having Toronto located next to a volcano though. Or anywhere near shifting tectonic plates.
Click to expand...
I have a thing about Dante's Peak but would not want to purchase property within the pyroclastic blast range. Isn't it ironic though? Cities with immense natural beauty almost always have a catch: natural disasters including hurricanes.
 
3Dementia said:
For the benefit of new members (and clarity), "Signature" was indeed the project name of the 69 storey tower announced by Concord in 2006 for this site... which is marked "TBD" on that site-plan.

Wild guess: Concord may have believed at the time that "Signature" would be the their signature tower for CityPlace. I'll sign off now. 🖋️

Model
Signature1.jpg

acotoronto.ca
Signature3.jpg

acotoronto.ca
Click to expand...
Oh wow! I remember posting that photo from the pamphlet I got from Concord. I literally took a photo with a webcam to be able to post it! haha.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top