This Project would serve the city's Skyline much better if they were a bit more eastwards; for instance on the LCBO block.

There will be too much density on the same area of the skyline, and too much people living in the same area together with all the proposed and under-construction buildings at the South Core.
 
The dazzling curves and wrap-around framing combine to create quite a striking statement. Additionally, the elevated crown concludes the tower in a dramatic fashion. Although glass of course is the dominant reoccurring theme, I am enjoying the subtle element variations explored in each building. Even the Toronto Star building looks well improved.
 
Truly impressive. The tower immediately north of the Toronto Star building remains a bit problematically close IMO, and it would have been nice to see a recladding of Toronto Star with pure black or white finishing - it would have created much needed "solidity" in what's more or less a series of glass towers. Better yet, it would be great if all the proposed towers can adopt that design element (think one tower with recessed windows in black, another in white and another in say something more outrageous...)

Not entirely convinced the plaza at Yonge/Harbour-Lakeshore E is the best solution.

jaycola:

The scale of this is, in my opinion, fitting for the foot of Toronto's premier street. I can't see why there would be calls to reduce height here.
So much of design is subjective, the design review panel should only deal with the how the project meets the street and casts shadows. The rest should be up to the disigners and architects themselves.
Click to expand...

Not that I would support calls to reduce height at this particular location with this design, but massing is very much a design issue.

AoD
 
Last edited:
This design is a very fitting "next wave" for this city. It's more expressionistic than we've become accustomed, all the while the approach is a touch conservative. Great work. I hope that it doesn't get tampered with too much in the approval process. Height? I expect that the proposed heights will be green-lighted, no one is offended because it's a natural evolution.
 
Is it possible that these end up being only pie-in-the-sky conceptual renderings of what could be done with the site? I'm kind of skeptical that a developer like Pinnacle would bring such ambitious architecture to the market.
 
Wow! So many incredible proposals in this city right now between the Mervish towers, Oxford, and now this. Please let at least one of these things become reality. These towers look like something out of Gotham City. Love it.
 
travis3000 said:
Wow! So many incredible proposals in this city right now between the Mervish towers, Oxford, and now this. Please let at least one of these things become reality. These towers look like something out of Gotham City. Love it.
Click to expand...

Tower envy.
Dubai-aerial-shot.jpg
We're definately heading in the right direction. I just hope that they plan for adequate infrastructure (all of them).
 

Attachments

  • Dubai-aerial-shot.jpg
    Dubai-aerial-shot.jpg
    97.1 KB · Views: 703
travis3000 said:
Wow! So many incredible proposals in this city right now between the Mervish towers, Oxford, and now this. Please let at least one of these things become reality. These towers look like something out of Gotham City. Love it.
Click to expand...

don't worry. it is just a matter of time whiners will come out and complain or "express concerns" about "shadow", "congestion" "too much density" "traffic" etc as if we live in suburban Regina.
Since when Toronto is so scared of some shadows? We are in downtown of a 6M metroplis and we are worried about shadow of buildings?
 
AG:

Funny, I thought that's what *planning* is about. Crazy that some think that there is only one way to build a city. Just because I think that this is an appropriate proposal doesn't meant there is no merit to shadowing or density concerns. I certainly don't think they should be dismissed out of hand without even the slightest investigation of whether those points have merit just because someone has a fondness of tall buildings.

AoD
 
Biggest problem: the landmark building on the corner. There shouldn't be a building there at all, as it acts like a barricade to this 'district' approaching from the city core, as many people will. Instead, there should be a open-air gate (could be covered) which invites people in the heart of this project. As it is, this looks like a commercial ghetto.

That building, which isn't too bad in itself, could replace one of the residential buildings to the east - thereby reducing the 'crowdedness'.

Another caveat: height. What's wrong with something like More London http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/more-london-masterplan/ ?
 
Redlom said:
Biggest problem: the landmark building on the corner. There shouldn't be a building there at all, as it acts like a barricade to this 'district' approaching from the city core, as many people will. Instead, there should be a open-air gate (could be covered) which invites people in the heart of this project. As it is, this looks like a commercial ghetto.

That building, which isn't too bad in itself, could replace one of the residential buildings to the east - thereby reducing the 'crowdedness'.

Another caveat: height. What's wrong with something like More London http://www.fosterandpartners.com/projects/more-london-masterplan/ ?
Click to expand...


If you look at the overhead site plan, you'll notice that this block will be laid out very much like Pinnacle Centre. Note what looks like a large central driveway:


5182d56ab3fc4bdec80000bd_one-yonge-hariri-pontarini-architects_130501_one_yonge_media_pack_small_5.jpg

http://www.archdaily.com/367812/one-yonge-hariri-pontarini-architects/
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top