interchange42 said:
I'll also agree that there should be a Heritage Conservation District in place around Nathan Phillips Square that should cause any major plans for buildings surrounding it to trigger an architectural review.

42
Click to expand...
Yeah, it wont be long before the two Thompson Bldgs. (built in the 70s) across the street get into the act
 
interchange42 said:
Okay, Mary MacDonald at Heritage Preservation has gotten back to me, and here is the answer that none of us will be very happy to read:

I have double-checked everything. When the designation was done for the property (1976), explicit reference was made that the Simpson's Tower was not included. The original listing (1973) was for the older portions only as well. Given that in 1973 the Simpson's Tower was only 4 years old (7 in 1976) it is understandable that there wasn't enough perspective on the modernist movement to inform an understanding of value. Of course, the designation could have been amended to include it after time had passed, but the necessity to do so wasn't on anyone's radar.

All Hudson's Bay needed was a building permit. They applied for one and got one. No other planning process was necessary. I cannot speak to the matter of the design review panel, though it would be atypical for a building permit application to be reviewed, and no link with the planning division to facilitate.​
Click to expand...

Just as I called it.
 
I just walked by, and there were about a dozen workers on site doing preparatory (i.e. scaffolding) work. Sadly, this looks to be moving forward quite quickly.
 
Dec 2:

IMG_0052.jpg
 

Attachments

  • IMG_0052.jpg
    IMG_0052.jpg
    1.6 MB · Views: 1,449
Not that I particularly like this building (I hate most of the buildings directly facing NPS on Queen), but it seems we are starting to make the office towers look exactly like those glass condos as well.
 
Slightly tinted low e glass is trending. I hope it doesn't apply here but, a building owner with tons of end of life precast to removed probably will think twice about using it again.
 
Well, So Long Hansom And hello future eye soar. They render make it appear to be mish mashed rather then simetrical. What a waste.
 
Last edited:
maybe we all need to move to cities where they respect thier architecture. simpson tower and its two nieghbours there are true to thier time. change the glass sure but what evers going on at the top, just odd.
 
Last edited:
A whole layer of this city's history is being erased. Concrete is out, so this building has to be glazed over and made to look South-Core generic.

This is the same thinking that allowed the old soot-covered pre-war buildings to be knocked down in order to put these types of buildings up in the first place. Now we look at old photographs and think: Damn, if they'd cleaned that up, renovated it, and invested in it, it would have become a landmark property.... and imagine how much more interesting our city would be!

Canadians are still incredibly shallow and unsophisticated when it comes to appreciation of architecture and the accumulation of culture. No wonder every second building that gets built here is a glass box with grey spandrel. As Winston Churchill said: "We shape our buildings; thereafter they shape us." :(
 
Fortunately you are so much more deep and sophisticated than the rest of us that you will buy and save every old building.
 
There it is. A mass generalization about Canadians over a building that wouldn't get a whole look of respect just about anywhere. Glass is big everywhere. Concrete modernism not so much. It's an average build even for its era.

The tower was powerwashed not too long ago. Maybe structural problems with the concrete facade were detected. Window replacement is one thing. To go and replace the concrete with what appears like aluminum composite panels is not something a building own would ordinarily do.
 
The concrete is in poor shape. I've noticed, on the south and east faces at least, metal bars and other contraptions holding together cracks in the concrete, particularly towards the top.
 
Yes, its being re-clad because the precast concrete has been crumbling. This is not to pass judgement on how and what they are replacing it with.

The shame is not only that we are losing the original intentions of the architect (and architecture) at the time it was built, but that the new tower cladding appears to be a mess. (although the opening up of the base could prove to be an improvement).
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top