The design team is international, only works internationally. It would be pretty hard for them to divorce themselves from the work they've already completed around the world. There are Pelli Clarke Pelli signatures in the design—there are swoops and curved corners and glassed-in atriums, all reflective of their worldwide work—the issue here is that this design simply isn't up to scratch yet, and they need to rethink a number of their choices.For such a prominent site, the proposal lacks a grand vision in my opinion. It is very clear that the design team was not looking internationally for inspiration, projects in South America and Asia come to mind.
I agree that with the North side needing to be refined. I don't think the bigger tower should go in the middle. It would look a bit like giving the finger to the City... The shadow studies also suggest that the west office tower is *just* scraping Clarence Square with incremental shadow --- moving the bigger tower west would increase this intrusion.I like their suggestion that the taller office tower should be the one to the west. I like the suggestion that the north side should not look like 'the back', that the park should be more significant, that the complex needs finer grain at ground level, that the winter garden should reach out more, etc. I like just about all of the suggestions.
KING Toronto, and M+GAfter the tall, iconic CN tower, really what other buildings in Toronto can be considered a " signature " ? The new proposals are all very similar in overall height so they won't stand out on height alone. I just hope they won't end up appearing chunky in order to achieve maximum floor spaces.