[3Dementia]

Re: BA render

I was really hoping for something like this... perhaps the hotel component will be unique. I'd love to a full-size Royal York Hotel on Temperance.

 

[GregWTravels]

Re: BA render

Looks like I'm in the minority here, but I prefer the glass and steel boxes to something really out there. It's good to have a few signature buildings (as we have in the CN Tower and associated scrotum... er, Rogers Centre), but too many buildings like that and the city starts to look more like a theme park than a city.

I think that if you are going to build signature buildings, the place to do it is closer to the waterfront anyway, so that's it's prominent in the skyline from the water. Bay-Adelaide is in the middle of downtown right now, so from most views outside of the city it'll be lost in the centre of the mass of towers.

 

[alklay]

Re: BA render

I don't know if most of us are calling for something way out there (Buck Rogers-like). I think most just want something a little braver and interesting (the Bloomberg building in New York or the 57-story Bryant Park building pictured below are two good examples of 'corporate' buildings that make good use of material and form, are slightly conservative, yet more interesting than a simple rectangle).

Bloomberg:

Bryant Park

 

[TdotTrickyRicky]

You would think they would go for something at least somewhat distinct even if they kept the same building shape and massing. Just say you were walking down the street looking for the building address. You could pass this building five times and not even know it. Although some criticize our current core for having bland buildings there is no doubt that the major players (TD centre, scotia bank, BCE etc.) are unmistakingly distinct. The BA centre as shown here tells us that it aspires to be of the secondary infill office tower class and not the primary big player market. I think this is the main point. If BA wants to be an infill office depot then its design might be a success, if it wants to be a primary address then i think one can almost objectively argue that its design is lacking.

 

[cassiusa]

Wow, there's some real critics of this tower here. I don't find the building to be at all offensive.

Great find, btw.

 

[Canuck 36]

It seems some find it to be offensive completely for its inoffensive nature.

 

[Brighter Hell]

Is this the kind of whining we can expect in P&C for the next 3 years? :\

 

[building babel]

Oh, I suspect it will get worse ...

 

[ahsun]

Just wait until they break-out the GREEN GLASS.

 

[alklay]

^ And the precast! I hear the north and east sides are precast and glass.

 

[Ed007Toronto]

 

[alklay]

Thanks for the pics Ed.

Here's hoping that they put something up soon after then take these suckers down.

 

[spmarshall]

Wow, that's fast for demolition to start.

 

[mpolo2]

is that a crane they are assembling ?

 

[wyliepoon]

3Dementia makes a good point about a hotel component. The current rendering isn't spectacular, but makes good economic sense, since (correct me if I'm wrong) this design is not for a corporate headquarter, and therefore there is no requirement in the design for corporate recognition. I assume the only requirement is to create a building that is cheap to build, and provides the most floor space, and the best way to fulfill that requirement is to build a box.

A hotel/residential component would allow a much more creative floorplan, and also a more creative building shape to attract buyers or residents. If a hotel component can be added to the office building, the whole thing might end up like 1 King West, with two distinct building components.

I have no clue what 3Dementia's photo is showing... a bunch of Arab sheiks looking at a site model with the Oriental Pearl TV Tower, the Bank of China and the Petronas Tower? Are they trying to build all of them at once or something?