I was going to say it looks a lot like BAC from this angle until I realized it was a photo of BAC.
 
Humour

I was mocking the Four Seasons tower by illustrating how remarkably similar it is to an new and fairly bland office tower. I find the FS to be a monolithic disappointment. I suppose it shouldn't be that unexpected as Menkes has not displayed a history of constructing luxury buildings.
 
androiduk said:
`
4ss13.jpg
Click to expand...

Nice shot guy!
 
If anyone actually thought that was the 4 season's for even a moment they really don't know their buildings.

At first glance they may look similar but I find there's really little in common between them. Yes they both have a high quality curtain wall with the same shade of blue, but that's about the only thing BAC's got going for it. Its blocky, very imposing at the street level, which is fine for the CBD but not in Yorkville and looks short and fat from a distance. Where as the massing of the 4 Season's is such that from up close it isn't imposing and remains street friendly thanks to the well placed set backs. Yet from a far it absolutely soars due to its slender proportions. They also made an attempt to create more visual interest by incorporating a few exterior details on the cladding, while BAC has nothing of the sort.

Oh yes and lets not forget about the fin's. You have BAC's example, where they did a half-a$$ed, barely there, tacked on-job and then you have the 4S, where they are being properly executed.
 
Last edited:
Vegeta, I think you are right-on with most points; it's really only on the glass that I disagree with you significantly. Whereas you see the glass as the same on both buildings while you notice the other differences, I see significant difference in the glass. To my eyes Four Seasons' glass reflects a much deeper blue than does BAC, and therefore Four Seasons is quicker to show as blue too: you only need a hint of blue in the sky for Four Seasons to pick it up, whereas BAC looks gray (silver would be a kinder way of saying gray, but I don't think that's a proper characterization of the effect really) more of the time.

It all goes to show that while a superficial overview might see these as buildings as siblings, a closer look reveals that they are second cousins, and one of them got all the looks.

42
 
Wasn't that a gorgeous sunset the other night? And how nicely - and differently - our variously-hued and subtly-hued glass towers reflect nature. Bay Adelaide is certainly one of the subtlest: at times it almost disappears.
 
Only can only hope.

42
 
One of the great appeals of the FS for me is its proportioning- it simply soars. Maybe if they stuck a quarter onion spire with a flag pole onto one of the top corners it would get more oohs and ahs :)
 
vegeta_skyline said:
If anyone actually thought that was the 4 season's for even a moment they really don't know their buildings.

At first glance they may look similar but I find there's really little in common between them. Yes they both have a high quality curtain wall with the same shade of blue, but that's about the only thing BAC's got going for it. Its blocky, very imposing at the street level, which is fine for the CBD but not in Yorkville and looks short and fat from a distance. Where as the massing of the 4 Season's is such that from up close it isn't imposing and remains street friendly thanks to the well place set backs. Yet from a far it absolutely soars due to its slender proportions. They also made an attempt to create more visual interest by incorporating a few exterior details on the cladding, while BAC has nothing of the sort.

Oh yes and lets not forget about the fin's. You have BAC's example, where they did a half-a$$ed, barely there, tacked on-job and then you have the 4S, where they are being properly executed.
Click to expand...

It's basically the BAC with tiny balconies. It actually dominates the street, particularly along Bay. It absolutely walls the entire neighbourhood.

Obviously I reserve opinions until viewing the finished project but from the exterior I can't believe anyone would pay $1500 psf for this very mediocre building. The Shangra La is shaping up to be a vastly superior structure in my opinion.
 
I think Bay Adelaide is the definition of a 21st Century office tower.
Four Seasons is a 21st Century hotel/condominium tower, with 21st Century office tower cladding.

Bay-Adelaide is a very nice building. It's got great cladding/facade on the outside, and contemporary interiors. It's boring, boxy design doesn't bug me though, as it fits in perfectly with the skyline. (reminiscent of First Canadian Place as well).

Four Seasons is the "sexier" version of Bay Adelaide. With a slimmer design, and more sophisticated design (with a few setbacks and balconies)

Both have little fins at the top.

Though I'm neutral on which one is better. Though they share many common and different features, Both are entirely different towers in purpose, location, etc....
 
CN Tower said:
It's basically the BAC with tiny balconies. It actually dominates the street, particularly along Bay. It absolutely walls the entire neighbourhood.
Click to expand...

I don't get that feeling whenever I walk by the 4S as the massing makes all the difference to me (and the cladding is probably not as similar as I thought either, its been a while since I've seen BAC up close and I trend to ignore it completely from a far). Where as BAC had always felt very imposing, along with most of the other big bank towers of course.

Also, if you want to see a real wall just walk 3 blocks south and look up at the Manulife Center. Although I don't mind it too much since its recessed from the street.

I do agree Shangra-la's is superior, but I wouldn't say "vastly". They're playing ball in the same league, while BAC is still in the minors.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top