Toronto The One | 328.4m | 91s | Mizrahi Developments | Foster + Partners

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Toronto: home to the world's tallest nuclear bunker.

And quite portable too! As those renders suggests, it can park itself west of the Shangri La.

 

[Lovestallthings]

In the event of nuclear war I know where I am heading...

 

[TossYourJacket]

And quite portable too! As those renders suggests, it can park itself west of the Shangri La.

Maybe the teleporting capabilities are why this is taking so long to build

 

[Johnny Au]

Better earlier than later

October 31, 2021:

 

[Bjays92]

Better earlier than later

October 31, 2021:

View attachment 359684View attachment 359685View attachment 359686

1BE looks rly good in that first photo

 

[AdamS]

 

[SkylineHorizon]

1BE looks rly good in that first photo

Indeed. Feels like it's under appreciated sometimes. It'll be interesting to see the contrast in styles side by side once the one is done, sweeping curves vs angular lines.

 

[dodgeram]

Indeed. Feels like it's under appreciated sometimes. It'll be interesting to see the contrast in styles side by side once the one is done, sweeping curves vs angular lines.

This render of the view from Yonge/Charles shows it pretty well. 1BE looks best from the North / South sides since it looks skinnier. It’s crazy how short it looks compared to 1BW (and this is without the height increase granted)

 

[isaidso]

This render of the view from Yonge/Charles shows it pretty well. 1BE looks best from the North / South sides since it looks skinnier.

Skinnier does not necessarily equate to better looking. That's very much subjective and personal preference. FCP, for instance, owes alot of its appeal to its girth. It would look worse if were skinnier. Same goes for the Sheraton Centre and TD Centre. The proportions (wider) elevate them. The skyline would be far less interesting and less attractive imo if all we had were skinny towers.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Skinnier does not necessarily equate to better looking. That's very much subjective and personal preference. FCP, for instance, owes alot of its appeal to its girth. It would look worse if were skinnier. Same goes for the Sheraton Centre and TD Centre. The proportions (wider) elevate them. The skyline would be far less interesting and less attractive imo if all we had were skinny towers.

Midtown Manhattan is having that problem - the new crop of skinny residential supertalls may look interesting on their own, but out of place (dare I say self-indulged) as a part of the general cityscape.

AoD

 

[dodgeram]

Midtown Manhattan is having that problem - the new crop of skinny residential supertalls may look interesting on their own, but out of place (dare I say self-indulged) as a part of the general cityscape.

AoD

Meh. People here complain that all new condos look the same. Then they’ll build ones that look different and people will say they look “out of place”. There’s no winning.

1BE also isn’t that skinny, it’s 9x as tall as it is wide. Billionaire row buildings in Manhattan are way skinnier, such as 111 West 57th which is 24x as tall as it is wide.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Meh. People here complain that all new condos look the same. Then they’ll build ones that look different and people will say they look “out of place”. There’s no winning.

1BE also isn’t that skinny, it’s 9x as tall as it is wide. The billionaire row buildings in Manhattan such as 111 West 57th is 24x as tall as it is wide.

Not saying the tower is too skinny in 1BE (or The One, for that matter) - this problem is fairly specific to NYC, and @isaidso 's observation has a point.

AoD

 

[steveve]

This render of the view from Yonge/Charles shows it pretty well. 1BE looks best from the North / South sides since it looks skinnier. It’s crazy how short it looks compared to 1BW (and this is without the height increase granted)

View attachment 360240

Interesting to note from this vantage point, The One and One Bloor East are essentially identical in width based on their floorplans (approximately 108 feet in the case of 1BE by my calculations).

To illustrate the differences in massing:

And from street level, the differences in height between the two will be far less noticeable to the naked eye:

As slender as The One is, in my books it's not a pencil tower.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Skinnier does not necessarily equate to better looking. That's very much subjective and personal preference. FCP, for instance, owes alot of its appeal to its girth. It would look worse if were skinnier. Same goes for the Sheraton Centre and TD Centre. The proportions (wider) elevate them. The skyline would be far less interesting and less attractive imo if all we had were skinny towers.

Office buildings and mid-century hotels are different buildings than modern residential towers. It's not really an apt comparison.

Midtown Manhattan is having that problem - the new crop of skinny residential supertalls may look interesting on their own, but out of place (dare I say self-indulged) as a part of the general cityscape.

AoD

Disagree. I quite love the insane aspect ratios we're getting in many of the new crop of Manhattan towers (even if there are other serious issues - social inequality, shoddy build quality, plutocratic vacancy, etc.).

 

[innsertnamehere]

Disagree. I quite love the insane aspect ratios we're getting in many of the new crop of Manhattan towers (even if there are other serious issues - social inequality, shoddy build quality, plutocratic vacancy, etc.).

not really for this thread, but generally, agreed. They are total monuments to humanity's insane wealth and are just totally prime New York. Wouldn't and couldn't happen anywhere else.

I gotta get back to New York..