St Regis Toronto Hotel and Residences | 281.93m | 58s | JFC Capital | Zeidler

grey

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
3,759
Reaction score
348
Location
Leslieville
It's a very sophisticated looking building and it looks right at home in Chicago. I can't imagine it on any site in downtown Toronto

Agreed. Trump Chicago wouldn't work at Bay & Adelaide. Zeidler's design is a pretty good fit for Toronto. I think the closest thing we have to the Chicago tower are the twin Sun Life towers. And the Eaton Centre towers as khristopher suggests. I guess the Chicago design would look okay somewhere north of Queen, maybe.
 

Translude15

Frank the Tank
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
715
Reaction score
379
Trump's Chicago design would not fit into the Toronto cityscape at all. It's riverside location on such a large plot of land allows for such a grand, massive project. Additionally, "Chicago" is not seen as the city's iconic, dominating project. It blends in subtly with the city's array of supertalls. Placed in Toronto, the tower would be seen as our iconic, dominating structure, and the drastic compariason between Toronto's other towers would be ridiculous. Too bold, too large, too different. It just wouldn't work.
 

Translude15

Frank the Tank
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 12, 2008
Messages
715
Reaction score
379
That location off of Bay is a possibility. Toronto's first supertall, (whenever that happens) should be placed north of Adelaide, around Queen, if you ask me. City Hall's stupid rules however would prevent that. That shadow by-law is sickening. Regardless, I'm still looking forward to Trump Toronto.
 

AKS

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 5, 2008
Messages
1,449
Reaction score
0
I thought 45 Bay st.(lot east of the ACC) just dont know if that lot is big enough for a supertall.

I don't think that space is big enough for the chicago size building. The TT lot size seems to be about the same as their current one or slightly bigger. Also, I think Trump would prefer to be located at the financial core. The current tower isn't too bad. It kind of reminds me of a trophy/award shape magnified into a building.
 

junctionist

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 1, 2007
Messages
9,190
Reaction score
3,312
Location
The Junction, Toronto
That location off of Bay is a possibility. Toronto's first supertall, (whenever that happens) should be placed north of Adelaide, around Queen, if you ask me. City Hall's stupid rules however would prevent that. That shadow by-law is sickening. Regardless, I'm still looking forward to Trump Toronto.

Sickening is a harsh word to describe a policy which keeps one of the city's most visible public spaces sunny.
 

Automation Gallery

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 5, 2007
Messages
12,654
Reaction score
3,264
Location
South Parkdale
Sickening is a harsh word to describe a policy which keeps one of the city's most visible public spaces sunny.

Im still puzzled how a tall building at Bay and Adelaide can create a shadow over City Halls grand square.Maybe and thats just maybe for a couple of minutes between December and January,and i doubt other than pigeons or seagulls you will see anyone out there suntanning.Who are they kidding,they have bigger problems with the eyesore buidings that they approved years ago across Queen street.
 
Last edited:

khris

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Aug 28, 2007
Messages
8,604
Reaction score
497
Location
Toronto, ON
There definitely are proper places in cities where open spaces are needed, without shadows thrown on everything in the space.
All major cities you can think of in the world have places like this.
Rio has it's big beach.
Paris has many open lawns and huge wide tree lined avenues.
NYC has big open parks in Central Park.

I guess NPS is our open space, although we have many others, such as Ashbridges Bay, and Sunnyside Beach.

Sorry to add to the off topic conversation, but I just wanted to throw that in there.

However, I do agree that NPS having a few shadows for a small amount of the day is really not a big deal...
 

adma

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
17,021
Reaction score
1,618
This is a city we're talking about here, not a beach. Promote the density and growth of the downtown core.

Yeah, sure. By any means possible; like, redlining all under-20-storey buildings along Bay for redevelopment. And I'd gladly embed a meat cleaver in your skull.
 

grey

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 29, 2007
Messages
3,759
Reaction score
348
Location
Leslieville
This is a city we're talking about here, not a beach. Promote the density and growth of the downtown core.
NPS and the small, precious radius of land surrounding it are not the only viable parcels of land in Toronto for densification.

Im still puzzled how a tall building at Bay and Adelaide can create a shadow over City Halls grand square.Maybe and thats just maybe for a couple of minutes between December and January,and i doubt other than pigeons or seagulls you will see anyone out there suntanning.Who are they kidding,they have bigger problems with the eyesore buidings that they approved years ago across Queen street.
Shadow and windtunnel studies are part of City Hall's approval process. It's not just something they arbitrarily decide. Height restrictions are backed by science. Examples were posted in the old Sapphire thread, I think.
 
Last edited:

Tewder

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 30, 2007
Messages
5,401
Reaction score
157
Isn't it true that in Chicago the parking garages of buildings are built above ground? If so, just increase the height of Toronto buildings by the depth of the underground parking and voila your super-talls? Personally I'd rather keep the parking underground and maintain the street-level vitality. I'm not commenting on street-level vitality in Chicago because I've never been there. Then again, there isn't a lot of street-level vitality in Toronto's financial district either, though for other reasons.
 

Edward

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
1,833
Reaction score
6
Location
West Canada
Who are they kidding,they have bigger problems with the eyesore buidings that they approved years ago across Queen street.

And its exactly those buildings that resulted in the shadowing policy we have today. Once they were built the city realized the mistake that they had made.
 

confusion

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 14, 2008
Messages
780
Reaction score
15
Location
Downtown Toronto
Isn't it true that in Chicago the parking garages of buildings are built above ground?

Since I used to live there I think I can answer that question... yeah there are a few, not too many. They do have one tall circular one though, which I think adds in nicely to a dense area.

Toronto definitely needs more above ground parking structures, especially downtown where they are noticeable absent.
 

Top