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

I never liked the European practice of numbering the ground floor as "0". When you count how many floors the building has from the outside, you would say, for example, 10. But the top floor would be the "9th" floor. It doesn't make sense to me. I do like how europeans label parking levels as -1, -2, etc. though. Instead of the American practice of P1, P2, or B1, B2, etc.

The zero is at least logical and intuitive. 0 is to a ground floor like 0.0 are to referential coordinates. Our current system has three common buttons for the grade level floor: "L", "G", and "1". And then, there's the addition of a star, which is to (somehow) make things clearer? Let's also not forget LL/UL, LG/UG. Ugh, indeed.
 
And then, there's the addition of a star, which is to (somehow) make things clearer?
That star is mandated by various disability acts (such as the Americans with Disability Act (ADA) and the Accessibility for Ontarians with Disability Act (AODA)) and by building codes.


ADA_Button_350.jpg


Yes, these elevators have to be inspected every so often.
 
Last edited:
I think this thing needs to get off the ground first before we talk about elevators... /sigh
 
The zero is at least logical and intuitive. 0 is to a ground floor like 0.0 are to referential coordinates. Our current system has three common buttons for the grade level floor: "L", "G", and "1". And then, there's the addition of a star, which is to (somehow) make things clearer? Let's also not forget LL/UL, LG/UG. Ugh, indeed.
I'm not trying to say the North American system is perfect. I prefer the European system in almost every way except for the numbering of the ground floor as 0.

using 0 in measurements is useful, but I feel like floor numbering isn't like a measurement. I think of it as more like a counting of physical objects. If you had 1 banana you wouldn't say you had "0" bananas, as that would suggest you had none. To me a building "has" (for example) 10 floors, and you can go to the first, second, third, etc., of those. Not the 0th.
 
I'm not trying to say the North American system is perfect. I prefer the European system in almost every way except for the numbering of the ground floor as 0.

using 0 in measurements is useful, but I feel like floor numbering isn't like a measurement. I think of it as more like a counting of physical objects. If you had 1 banana you wouldn't say you had "0" bananas, as that would suggest you had none. To me a building "has" (for example) 10 floors, and you can go to the first, second, third, etc., of those. Not the 0th.

Interesting. I think of floor numbers as labels. Letters would do as well to let you know when to get off the elevator. I am not attached to any particular labelling system, but it would be nice if everyone agreed on a standard. It just occurred to me that letters are not transferable between nations not sharing the same language. Nor would an ancient Roman feel comfortable dealing with Arabic numerals, should one happen to visit us. I mean a Roman more ancient than myself.
 
The zero is at least logical and intuitive. 0 is to a ground floor like 0.0 are to referential coordinates. Our current system has three common buttons for the grade level floor: "L", "G", and "1". And then, there's the addition of a star, which is to (somehow) make things clearer? Let's also not forget LL/UL, LG/UG. Ugh, indeed.

idk, I find "1" to be the most intuitive for the ground floor.
 
Of course the term "Ground Floor" was used because it was (in UK) the floor level with the ground and often had no 'flooring'. The first 'floor' was the next one up. BUT I am now used to buildings that have NO 1st floor but call it Ground and then start the numbering with 2. I think this is one of those discussions that will never reach a conclusion that is satisfactory to anyone!
 
I have created a thread to discuss floor numbering schemes:


This way, this thread can return to The One and Mizrahi's involvement in it.
 
Aug 8
Lot of core and saw cutting taking place.
50213204192_38e931a9f4_b.jpg

50212934971_65832fb30c_b.jpg

50213204347_79fc6a6b03_b.jpg

50212405738_f41c04c1bb_b.jpg

50213204562_b6aae8f122_b.jpg

50213204677_46b7b2805b_b.jpg

50212406243_96605c67e2_b.jpg

50212406478_8d81bcc812_b.jpg

50213205422_1de99e9a25_b.jpg

50213205567_27887ff680_b.jpg

50212936516_71e9d38b58_b.jpg

50213205857_e6d9ac8a59_b.jpg

50212407163_22cc9ffdec_b.jpg

50212407493_34c0bc0585_b.jpg

50212937086_dc3aeabbb9_b.jpg

50212937306_a31465d28d_b.jpg
 
Why are they cutting the concrete?
Many reason why starting with the standard Opps!!. Them poor workmanship or materiel, design change, items that weren't install first, removal of temporarily support and so on. Sometime things look great on paper, but it can't be done in the field or looks wrong
 

Back
Top