[UtakataNoAnnex]

Apparently not;
View attachment 539284
The city only provides "guidance" in regards to architectural lighting, although I can definitely see that changing if more people start complaining about 'light pollution' going forward. It's only building signage that requires approval for now.

Either way, the fact they are looking into it (and likely, case by case if other towers jump onto that bandwagon)....and the fact they would likely pass a by-law if does become an issue, backs up my original quote of our skyline not becoming a tactless Christmas Tree park anytime in our future.

 

[rdaner]

Pretty sure that’s where the held the ribbon cutting with Dougie Ford. There are photos few pages back.

160 Front West | 239.87m | 46s | Cadillac Fairview | AS + GG

So graceful!

urbantoronto.ca

Yes but nothing since. I want to see a spread of the space itself which I think is the first of its kind.

 

[evandyk]

I think it's still just an empty space, though I don't know what they do about the huge crane that is housed there. The north side sign has the same "Black History Month" signage as on BCE Place right now.

 

[JasonParis]

That name wasn't shared with TD people until recently so most people working on it for the last few years were calling it 160. I would think CF would prefer to not have their whole building named after one co-owner.

Unfortunately, some of the new PATH signage in neighbouring buildings, such as Simcoe Place, have been installed with arrows pointing to "160 Front St W" instead of "TD Terrace."

 

[rdsoc]

Ambitious signage attempt for the year of the dragon..

 

[evandyk]

I saw the one on BCE place from Jarvis and it's too detailed to really see what it was. Thanks!

 

[adma]

As an old-fashioned casual urban architectural tourist of the pre-Y2K free-range sort, here's a bit of "new reality" that saddened me when I passed by the ground floor lobby a week or two ago: how it'd appear that the upper floors are inaccessible to all but passholders. That is, the "full architectural experience" is sealed off to the proles--all we can do is gawk at the exterior...

 

[toronstruction]

 

[LUVIT!]

I like it finally were getting some lighting that is NOT subtle!

 

[marcus_a_j]

It’s quite the view terminus when driving eastbound on the Gardiner, east of Dufferin.

 

[C-mac]

View attachment 539830

cringe worthy. You can barely tell it's a building.

 

[xy3]

It looks great lit up in softer warm white light. It's the best way to accentuate the scalloped facade.

The colored LEDs just look garish and detract from it.

 

[mav_86]

Ultimate bird killer...great job architects.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

...and I think the lighting it's wonderful. /shrug <3

 

[ProjectEnd]

Apparently not;
View attachment 539284
The city only provides "guidance" in regards to architectural lighting, although I can definitely see that changing if more people start complaining about 'light pollution' going forward. It's only building signage that requires approval for now.

This is absolutely not the case. I've been through a lighting application and they take you through the ringer.