News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 02, 2020
A Message to Our Readers
 8.9K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
EarthCam Time-Lapse Documents Rafael Viñoly-Designed New Stanford Hospital Construction
 40K     0 
News   GLOBAL  |  Apr 01, 2020
Resort Town
 5.1K     0 

pancsi said:
I couldn't disagree more. One of the things I like about this building (and I am a supporter of this project) is that at this point they do not show a logo on the project. In my opinion the best buildings in the city do not have Billboards on the buildings facade. TD centre is completly identifiable withouta company logo. FCP looked much better before the change in logo (I didn't mind the oringal one because I thought it was tasteful). CIBC looks terrible with the companys initials. For a better idea of what I'm talking about please see any project owned by Ted Rogers.
Click to expand...

The old CIBC logo would have looked classy enough, like how it used to be on 2 Bloor West. The new one is horrible - "let's just put our initials on top of a swoosh - now that's a logo!"

For some reason, I don't mind the 1 Mount Pleasant Rogers logo, I like how they are mounted, but agree that the Ryerson Business Building, or SkyDome are bad.

And why would KPMB have a logo on the building? It wouldn't stand out, unlike the crappy BMO logo or the TD logo at BCE Place. Also, usually logos are on buildings associated with the company more - the TD logo is on the Canada Trust tower at BCE, the CIBC logo on Commerce Court, BNS on Scotia Plaza.
 
If you're lower class, your name is on your shirt.
If you're middle class, your name in on your door.
If you're upper class, you name is your the building.

If you're a turd, you don't have to worry about shirts, doors or buildings.
 
The old CIBC logo was elegant, corporate and powerful-looking. The new one is... I don't even know, I hate it!
 
I sat through a rather dull presentation on the Bay Adelaide project at the Real Estate Forum this week. It ended with a rather tame staged debate between Ryk Stryland from Brookfield (the senior guy in charge of the project) and the KPMG rep on building signage. The KPMG guy said they wanted signage, but Stryland said it's Brookfield policy to avoid giving naming rights/signage, because it could make other tenants (or potential tenants) unhappy. Given that the lease is already done, it seems likely it's not going to be called the KPMG Tower anytime soon.

The architect, Carl Blanchaer from WZMH, was also on the panel, which also discussed the elimination of the side fins and associated lighting from the design, partly at the behest of of KPMG, who felt it their views would be compromised. Blanchaer didn't seem too happy about the change to the design. So now the corners will be plain except for the notch providing an extra four corner offices per floor. In place of the fins will be a short glass extension up above the top floor on all four sides.
 
Electricitypants said:
The architect, Carl Blanchaer from WZMH, was also on the panel, which also discussed the elimination of the side fins and associated lighting from the design, partly at the behest of of KPMG, who felt it their views would be compromised. <snip> In place of the fins will be a short glass extension up above the top floor on all four sides.
Click to expand...

How could these fins have compromised the views from inside the building (and presumably below the roof fins)? I guess that without before-and-after floor plans for the affected floors we will never know -- perhaps the fins required extra steel supports, partly blocking the views?.

Bill
 
BA went from elegant interesting box to just box. It's incredible how one minor design change (in this case the partially soaring wings) can make or break the design. I just didn't expect cheapening to happen from Brookfield, on such a high-profile tower.
 
caltrane74 said:
We'll talk about this at the meet filip.
Click to expand...

I'll be in Ottawa so I won't make it.

Look, Brookfield is arguably the largest developer in North America. They have more than enough money to give us something decent to look at. I mean, don't get me wrong! I LOVE boxes! I love boxes that soar, with a bit of variety (point to 1BE, RBC, etc)... What Brookfield is putting up is basically a shorter FCP clad in glass, I'm sorry but this isn't 1976 anymore.

Look at what Brookfield is doing in NYC, an incredible redevelopment project with towers that push every boundary possible. I'm definitely not asking for that on the BA site, but anything, anything other than a big glass box would do it.
 
And I'm going to put this out there right now. I don't care what some of the modernism thumpers here have to say about it - but the 1989 PoMo pyramid top version was MUCH nicer.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top