Toronto Telus House - 25 York Street | 136.24m | 30s | Menkes | Sweeny &Co

I agree that viewing the Royal York from the lake is irrelevant. Eventually the whole city is going to transform south of the financial district. There will be even more condos, perhaps more office towers in the distant future, and a new waterfront that will connect to the city in a different way.

The Royal York is an iconic Toronto building, but it stands on its own and we don't need to clear space all around it. Things change; the city develops. Let's just hope no one gets the idea of tearing it down anytime soon. I would vehemently oppose that.
 
As long as we don't build on top of Union Station, the Royal York should always have a greater prominence and visibility than most buildings.
 
The Royal York is an iconic building, but only a commercial one. If Toronto ever advances to the point where we start preserving view corridors of iconic buildings, priority ought to be given to civic and cultural ones, surely?

We had a lively public debate recently over the impact that the proposed ROM condo tower would have, including the impact it would have on views north on University Avenue - dwarfing the Legislature at Queens Park, and looking south towards the ROM and the U of T.

Yet, when you stand at the foot of Bay Street and look north, the once iconic view of Old City Hall, standing against the skyline - as it was intended to be seen - has gone, destroyed by the ROCP tower directly beyond it. Old City Hall isn't just dwarfed, visually, it is subsumed by a residential tower.
 
Say what you want about the iconic Royal York, but don't you ever call me Shirley.

Anyway, if any commercial building in the city deserves special preservation - which I'm not saying needs to happen - the Royal York would certainly qualify.
 
While I will miss Royal York's prominence, I don't think Telus or any other tower should be stopped because it might block some "view". It's called progress. Not necessarily progress at any cost, but its just a view people, the building is still there!
 
Unlike Vancouver, I don't believe there are planning guidelines regarding 'scenic views' in TO. City Hall does seem to have issues with shadows however :rolleyes The traditional views of the Royal York from the south have inevitably been disappearing for years now.

As some have mentioned- a taller office building in that location would be more appropriate. Particularly considering a few metres away the twin towers of MAple Leaf square will soon be rising. I'm not fond of the Telus sign on top, however I do like the idea of clear glass on this building.
 
"City Hall does seem to have issues with shadows "

"a taller office building in that location would be more appropriate."


basically answer your own question as to why the tower isn't taller
 
Not sure I get you- do you mean the tower isn't taller because of its shadow?
 
Because the developer didn't want to spend years trying to lease a big tower in a market that has been virtually dead the last 15 years?
 
As some have mentioned- a taller office building in that location would be more appropriate. Particularly considering a few metres away the twin towers of MAple Leaf square will soon be rising.
Click to expand...

But--well, let's not nit-pick over the whole "blocking views" issue too much, except that city planning probably have that quasi-in-mind, but--***why taller***?

It seems that the only excuse for "taller" is that other nearby towers new and proposed are "taller". Keeping up with the Joneses. Like, somehow, "not tall" = "not virile".

It isn't a sophisticated argument; and it isn't a sophisticated approach to urbanism. However well designed, supertall horror vacuii isn't a path to a great city. Shorter can be good urban counterbalance--and if there's any problems w/Telus, "too short" isn't prime among them. (And in a hem-and-haw urbanistic way, its relatively modest stature probably *does* bow to the fact of Union Station/Royal York.)

Sheesh, people, stop being such supertall dorks. Your 1960s equivalents would probably have knocked any new tower that didn't abide by the Seagram-style tower/plaza parti. And your 70s equivalents would have been defending Breuer's supertall plans for Grand Central...
 
"Not sure I get you- do you mean the tower isn't taller because of its shadow? "

AFAIK, the city is as concerned over shadowing Union's main entrance as they are with NPS (and if true, I somewhat agree)
 
What's the construction going on diagonally across the road from the Telus building? The southwest side of Bremner and York seems to have more activity than the Telus site.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top