Toronto RBC WaterPark Place III | 140.2m | 30s | Oxford Properties | WZMH

Today:

30954866511_e8d70d9ba4_b.jpg
 
There was minimal coverage of this yesterday, and I'd never have known if I hadn't have walked past (or through actually, that part of the PATH that I was going to use was closed). Looks like some glass fell from the '31st story". Only City and CP24 covered - and only City seems to dispatched someone to the scene, whose photo doesn't show that high on the building. http://www.citynews.ca/2017/05/20/falling-glass-shuts-down-part-of-queens-quay/

It wasn't entirely clear, but looking at the building, it appeared that there was some glass missing on the south side about 5 floors below the top, below the south RBC sign, at the corner to the right a bit. Here's a blow-up of a photo I took, and the entire photo. Looked to me like it was angled inwards - but this was about 3 pm, about 5 hours later, and perhaps they were trying to repair/replace?

Blowup
upload_2017-5-21_18-4-32.png


Full Photo
IMG_20170520_150358_panorama.jpg
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-5-21_18-4-32.png
    upload_2017-5-21_18-4-32.png
    120.6 KB · Views: 1,647
  • IMG_20170520_150358_panorama.jpg
    IMG_20170520_150358_panorama.jpg
    1.2 MB · Views: 1,664
Last edited:
Theres somthing kind of Chicago-esque about the choice of curtainwall and bulky floor plates of this tower, and I think it works.
 
xy3 said:
Theres somthing kind of Chicago-esque about the choice of curtainwall and bulky floor plates of this tower, and I think it works.
Click to expand...
It works if you're a fan of shabbiness, I suppose… I wonder if this was the cheapest curtain wall ever put up in the city? It's certainly vying for that title in effect if not in reality. With that many damaged panels, hopefully RBC is seeing that their lack of proper investment in the past has come back to bite them badly enough that they'll go for a larger fix here and reclad this vertical dump with something that everyone could be proud of.

42
 
It's pretty incredible what this stupid City will tolerate. Oxford works in markets all over the world, and while I'll be the first one to say that each market is unique, I'd also say that Toronto is unique in that we either don't care, or are too incompetent to demand better. London rents and construction budgets far exceed Toronto's, yes, but Leadenhall (for example) is also the result of City of London Council not accepting anything less. It's both sides working together towards an exemplary result:

Cheesegrater_and_Gherkin.jpg
 
ProjectEnd said:
It's pretty incredible what this stupid City will tolerate. Oxford works in markets all over the world, and while I'll be the first one to say that each market is unique, I'd also say that Toronto is unique in that we either don't care, or are too incompetent to demand better. London rents and construction budgets far exceed Toronto's, yes, but Leadenhall (for example) is also the result of City of London Council not accepting anything less. It's both sides working together towards an exemplary result:

Cheesegrater_and_Gherkin.jpg
Click to expand...
Not sure why the 'City" has any role in this. While I certainly wish that we had 'prettier' or more 'iconic' buildings and that they are well built, it is not up to the City to determine design (would you want Denzil M-W or Holyday deciding on design??). The City's powers are limited to ensuring a design is safe, meets Zoning and is built to standard.
 
  • Like
Reactions: AHK
DSC said:
Not sure why the 'City" has any role in this. While I certainly wish that we had 'prettier' or more 'iconic' buildings and that they are well built, it is not up to the City to determine design (would you want Denzil M-W or Holyday deciding on design??). The City's powers are limited to ensuring a design is safe, meets Zoning and is built to standard.
Click to expand...
The difference between London and Toronto is that the Mayor of London's office actually has a huge amount of control over the approval of developments, and that includes being able to reject them based on design (among other reasons).
 
It's both the City's fault, but much more largely the province's fault. Both are in bed with the development industry, and they pander to them so intensely that both parties will bend over backwards on a whim so they can get more contributions. Until development money stops controling our electoral system, this never ending flow of crap being developed will continue.

The thing is, even if the City wanted to do anything about build quality, the province would just override them.
 
TossYourJacket said:
The difference between London and Toronto is that the Mayor of London's office actually has a huge amount of control over the approval of developments, and that includes being able to reject them based on design (among other reasons).
Click to expand...
Maybe that will change now that John Tory will be a "strong mayor" 🤣
 
TossYourJacket said:
The difference between London and Toronto is that the Mayor of London's office actually has a huge amount of control over the approval of developments, and that includes being able to reject them based on design (among other reasons).
Click to expand...
And yet the Brits (well, the Guardian at least) still complain about the banal architecture of London's new residential builds. Obviously, the columnist has never been to Toronto ...

www.theguardian.com

Like a beige, banal biscuit tin: why London’s new buildings all look the same | India Block

After the 2008 crisis, developers adopted a cookie-cutter design style. You can (partly) thank Boris Johnson, says design journalist India Block
www.theguardian.com www.theguardian.com
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top