[grey]

I like the new design the most, too. It's not terribly interesting, but at least it isn't 2 and 3 (good lord). The original PoMo would look pretty out of place, I think. It looks more suited to Saskatoon/Edmonton/Calgary. I think another tall box will actually look good in the CBD. If variety means stupid flimsy roof elements or topsy-turvy elevations, then forget about it. Towers like Scotia and BCE give the CBD all the variety it needs. Now it needs some boxy density to make them stand out more.

If all of these high profile corners grew towers with "variety roofs" the skyline would look like a prickly mess. I guess I'm less concerned with how this building looks itself, and more interested in how it complements the rest of downtown.

I prefer to think of the latest design as minimalist, not boxy and boring (even if it is).

 

[AndreaPalladio]

No, there is a rendering of it - I have it somewhere on one of my old external hard drives. It was a water painting I believe. Unless, AndreaPalladio, you're saying that so it doesn't make an appearance in this thread?

I'd love to see it - I've never seen it before.

 

[cassius]

I'd love to see it - I've never seen it before.

Sorry, I was mistakenly thinking of the old Ritz-Carlton proposal for the current Trump site.

 

[adma]

I don't know if the PoMo-pyramid one would have been a *mistake*--being routine is one thing, being a mistake is another...

 

[turdrockfromthesun]

... and fitting in with the time that it's designed yet a third.. a product of its time

 

[Sir Novelty Fashion]

Door #2! I choose door #2!

And behind door #2 there is... a stump.

 

[Hydrogen]

For me, it's version two or 2006. Version one would be dated. Version three is - uh - something.

For me, the box wins because it's clean and unfussy (imo). Now to beg for really nice glass...

 

[canarob]

The only thing I like about version 3 is that the heritage facade looks less awkward.

I don't mind version 1 or 2, but I prefer version 4 for the simple reason that we are getting two towers instead of one. The fact that the new project has a condo/hotel project directly to the north is also an added bonus. I think BA will work better as a complex than as individual towers.

 

[turdrockfromthesun]

For me, it's version two or 2006. Version one would be dated. Version three is - uh - something.

For me, the box wins because it's clean and unfussy (imo). Now to beg for really nice glass...

Nice glass! GOOD ONE! Ha! Good point, but not going to happen!

 

[Hydrogen]

Well, with Christmas coming, I thought why not ask...

 

[Tuscani01]

Nice glass! GOOD ONE! Ha! Good point, but not going to happen!

Well my friend at Ellis Don has told me that the glass which can be seen on site may not be used on the building in the end. Here's to hoping they get something right!

 

[jamesnumber2]

There's a new homepage for the BA,at Brookfield,with a new picture- looks sharp.Go to thel rendering/live cam page.too bad they no long have a webcam.

 

[Bogtrotter]

Is the rendering new? It seems the same to me, but I suppose it's hard to make a box look any different.

 

[Tewder]

I like the PoMo version the best. Minimalism is starting to feel conservative and vanilla to me now. With the right height the PoMo iteration of BA would have strong vertcality, boldness, and most importantly for boxy ol' Toronto a move away from the box that doesn't feel like a gimmicky afterthought. Besides, in the context of the rest of the CBD this design wouldn't feel 'Houston'-like at all.

 

[caltrane74]

I love the conformity of the minmalist boxes on the Toronto horizon. What would be great in the future is to have waaaay more boxes, and then "here and there" a really great "out of the box" design thrown into the mix. (a la : hummingbird tower or absolute world Mississauga).

Now that would be nice.