Joe R.
Banned
Do you know why? Isn't the vertical strip still lit, but the horizontal band around the top is off?
Do you know why? Isn't the vertical strip still lit, but the horizontal band around the top is off?
RC8
Senior Member
Which is why we should be trying to avoid causing even more damage. Every year significantly over 1 million birds die in collisions with buildings. It's ridiculous and we should be doing our best to not interfere with their migration patterns. One big building can actually make a big difference.
The CN Tower and others at least turn the lights off during migration season at a certain time... but we could be doing a lot more.
It's not just about birds, either. Healthier bird populations enhance agricultural output among other things.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
Nearly every new condo & office building being clad in glass probably isn't helping the birds much either.
I think that's great that the Ritz might potentially be open to illuminating their building at night, but they really need to consult with professionals who are well versed on lighting and design.
I think that's great that the Ritz might potentially be open to illuminating their building at night, but they really need to consult with professionals who are well versed on lighting and design.
Last edited:
Joe R.
Banned
Who knows how accurate those numbers are--I wouldn't be surprised if they're exaggerated. Birds are going to fly into buildings whether they're lit or not; one flew into my living room window, when I was a child, while the room was unlit. Also, wouldn't the reflection of the sun on our glass buildings disorientate birds and cause the same negative affects? Specific species aren't going to going to go extinct from head on collisions with buildings.
Hypothetically, the Ritz could also turn their lights off or dim them during migration periods.
Do you seriously think lighting interferes that significantly with agriculture output? Most of the earth is untouched by humans. Birds have more than enough space to thrive.
Last edited:
RC8
Senior Member
I've worked with FLAP and the number of collisions may actually hover around the 3-4 million mark on some years. I usually use a million + being very conservative.
Cladding our towers in glass does a whole lot of damage indeed, but by putting small almost imperceptible designs on the glass (such as at the new George Brown Waterfront Campus), day-time collisions can be greatly reduced. The leading cause of night collisions is light pollution, which disorients birds and can make them literally run into concrete walls. Since it is light pollution and not exclusively tall light pollution that causes trouble, sprawly areas are already less than ideal habitat for migratory birds. If it were just the towers that would be one thing, but the towers are just compounding the issue.
Excess light pollution is very unpleasant for many people, too, and can be psychologically stressful even if we are generally unaware of it.
Toronto is located on a strategical point along the migratory route. Most birds that migrate South from the most productive agricultural area in Ontario and beyond actually pass through Toronto on their way. They come down until they hit Lake Ontario, and then move along West and exit the Great Lakes through the Niagara region. It is for this reason that the Leslie Spit and Pickering offer some of the finest bird-counting destinations in North America.
dt_toronto_geek
Superstar
What is the area for all these collisions RC8? Toronto? The GTA? North America? The world?
True, I became very aware of it a decade or so ago. In my stressful job there's nothing like coming home to moderately lit rooms (every room has a dimmer, even the bathroom!) and in my bedroom I have blackout blinds plus curtains to keep the sun out when desired plus relaxing, dark green painted walls. It really helps me relax and helps with my anxiety.
RC8
Senior Member
The City of Toronto - including Scarborough, North York, and Etobicoke.
The calculation is done on the hypothetical basis that a building kills on average at least one bird every year. In reality there are many buildings that are known to kill many hundreds of birds every year, so the average of 1 bird per building is conservative and accounts for the possibility that many buildings on any given year may actually not kill anything in any of the 2 migration periods.
People have actually picked random buildings to see if they find at least one collided bird around any of the offender buildings and sure enough almost every building that has been thoroughly researched has killed not just one but many birds over the course of the year.
It is worth noting that the absolute worst buildings are actually glass suburban offices that reflect trees during the day, followed by lit-skyscrapers at night downtown.
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I would be interested to see how many bird strike deaths there are in places like Scarborough or Mississauga compared to the downtown core. Are dense clusters of skyscrapers more dangerous to a bird than an 8 storey blue glassed business park that is surrounded by nothing? I'm not trying to be cynical, I am genuinely curious about the issue.
RC8
Senior Member
There's very little info on Mississauga. Business parks in Scarborough are absolutely terrible on a casualties-per-building basis, especially for day-time collisions. In denser areas light pollution is the biggest issue, even though places like the TD Centre are a hazard even during the day due to all the reflective glass.
Here's a personal story. This summer I saw a peregrine falcon carrying a pigeon crash directly against the 4th story of the Toronto Dominion Centre. The falcon was lucky that the dead pigeon took most of the impact, and was able to fly away... if it weren't for its prey it would have taken a much bigger hit.
Here's a personal story. This summer I saw a peregrine falcon carrying a pigeon crash directly against the 4th story of the Toronto Dominion Centre. The falcon was lucky that the dead pigeon took most of the impact, and was able to fly away... if it weren't for its prey it would have taken a much bigger hit.
maestro
Senior Member
I've witness two and heard of many more office drones (nearly) breaking their noses on glass partitions in the workplace. Brirds aren't the only ones.
DarkSideDenizen
Senior Member
Are they still planning to put the logo up near the top?
Last edited:
Contra
Senior Member
I think the general consensus is no. Shame really, their logo is brilliant. Also a shame with Shangri-La's placement of their signage. Unless you're high up or far away it's basically lost at the top of the tower.
Joe R.
Banned
I like the placements of Shangri-La's logo. Better than placing them right on the glass.
SP!RE
°°°°°°
It seems oddly missing on one hand for this tower, but generally I don't approve of logos on towers. I think it's nicer to let the architecture speak for itself.
Joe R.
Banned
I generally agree as well, but this building is an exception. It's one of the nicest corporate logos and it would add some visual interest to the north facade, which is pretty dull looking.