dodgeram

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 25, 2021
Messages
78
Reaction score
399
Midtown Manhattan is having that problem - the new crop of skinny residential supertalls may look interesting on their own, but out of place (dare I say self-indulged) as a part of the general cityscape.

AoD
Meh. People here complain that all new condos look the same. Then they’ll build ones that look different and people will say they look “out of place”. There’s no winning.

1BE also isn’t that skinny, it’s 9x as tall as it is wide. Billionaire row buildings in Manhattan are way skinnier, such as 111 West 57th which is 24x as tall as it is wide.
 
Last edited:

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
31,129
Reaction score
23,579
City:
Toronto
Meh. People here complain that all new condos look the same. Then they’ll build ones that look different and people will say they look “out of place”. There’s no winning.

1BE also isn’t that skinny, it’s 9x as tall as it is wide. The billionaire row buildings in Manhattan such as 111 West 57th is 24x as tall as it is wide.

Not saying the tower is too skinny in 1BE (or The One, for that matter) - this problem is fairly specific to NYC, and @isaidso 's observation has a point.

AoD
 

steveve

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
6,087
Reaction score
7,134
This render of the view from Yonge/Charles shows it pretty well. 1BE looks best from the North / South sides since it looks skinnier. It’s crazy how short it looks compared to 1BW (and this is without the height increase granted)

View attachment 360240

Interesting to note from this vantage point, The One and One Bloor East are essentially identical in width based on their floorplans (approximately 108 feet in the case of 1BE by my calculations).

To illustrate the differences in massing:

The One.jpg


And from street level, the differences in height between the two will be far less noticeable to the naked eye:

51647504604_2cbde12efa_h.jpg


As slender as The One is, in my books it's not a pencil tower.
 

ProjectEnd

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 28, 2007
Messages
11,715
Reaction score
22,271
Skinnier does not necessarily equate to better looking. That's very much subjective and personal preference. FCP, for instance, owes alot of its appeal to its girth. It would look worse if were skinnier. Same goes for the Sheraton Centre and TD Centre. The proportions (wider) elevate them. The skyline would be far less interesting and less attractive imo if all we had were skinny towers.
Office buildings and mid-century hotels are different buildings than modern residential towers. It's not really an apt comparison.
Midtown Manhattan is having that problem - the new crop of skinny residential supertalls may look interesting on their own, but out of place (dare I say self-indulged) as a part of the general cityscape.

AoD
Disagree. I quite love the insane aspect ratios we're getting in many of the new crop of Manhattan towers (even if there are other serious issues - social inequality, shoddy build quality, plutocratic vacancy, etc.).
 

innsertnamehere

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 8, 2010
Messages
16,343
Reaction score
13,857
City:
Toronto
Disagree. I quite love the insane aspect ratios we're getting in many of the new crop of Manhattan towers (even if there are other serious issues - social inequality, shoddy build quality, plutocratic vacancy, etc.).
not really for this thread, but generally, agreed. They are total monuments to humanity's insane wealth and are just totally prime New York. Wouldn't and couldn't happen anywhere else.

I gotta get back to New York..
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
31,129
Reaction score
23,579
City:
Toronto
Office buildings and mid-century hotels are different buildings than modern residential towers. It's not really an apt comparison.

Disagree. I quite love the insane aspect ratios we're getting in many of the new crop of Manhattan towers (even if there are other serious issues - social inequality, shoddy build quality, plutocratic vacancy, etc.).

I find the visual effect of these toothpick towers sticking out anemically from a base of far more muscular structures unsatisfying. It looked like a staccato of noise in the overall composition.

AoD
 

steveve

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 1, 2009
Messages
6,087
Reaction score
7,134
I find the visual effect of these toothpick towers sticking out anemically from a base of far more muscular structures unsatisfying. It looked like a staccato of noise in the overall composition.

AoD

Imo, the super slenders on 57th street have made Manhattan's skyline less aesthetically pleasing but more awe-inspiring at the same time. It's bittersweet.
 

Bjays92

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 9, 2020
Messages
892
Reaction score
2,491
I find the visual effect of these toothpick towers sticking out anemically from a base of far more muscular structures unsatisfying. It looked like a staccato of noise in the overall composition.

AoD
I agree with this completely. Maybe if it was just one it would be fine but I cant stand the way they look on the skyline together especially from certain angles.

I'm also in the camp that really likes 432 Park though.

As someone else pointed out though, office towers and condominiums aren't really comparable. Look at even the new office buildings going up in the city, CIBC Square, 160 Front and even The Well office tower, are all extremely wide at least from some angles. I personally prefer the slender side of CIBC Square but it would look weird if it was that slim all the way the round vs the rectangular shape it has now.

I also really like the mix of wider and thinner towers we're starting to see throughout the city. Massey Tower, as well as harbourfront plaza and ice condos look great because they're among wider more beefy towers. The slenderness also makes them appear taller to the human eye which is something I always appreciate. If we just had skinnier towers like that though I don't think the skyline would look nearly as interesting. In the case of The One, the exterior design perfectly suits the dimensions of the building. Toronto will have a nice, tall and relatively slim tower, but it is nowhere close to what you see in New York. The closest we have to that in Toronto is either the 1200 bay proposal which is only slender from 2 sides or Scotia Plaza which only appears slender from certain angles thanks to an optical illusion.
 

tstormers

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Dec 5, 2014
Messages
449
Reaction score
1,872
I agree with this completely. Maybe if it was just one it would be fine but I cant stand the way they look on the skyline together especially from certain angles.

I'm also in the camp that really likes 432 Park though.

As someone else pointed out though, office towers and condominiums aren't really comparable. Look at even the new office buildings going up in the city, CIBC Square, 160 Front and even The Well office tower, are all extremely wide at least from some angles. I personally prefer the slender side of CIBC Square but it would look weird if it was that slim all the way the round vs the rectangular shape it has now.

I also really like the mix of wider and thinner towers we're starting to see throughout the city. Massey Tower, as well as harbourfront plaza and ice condos look great because they're among wider more beefy towers. The slenderness also makes them appear taller to the human eye which is something I always appreciate. If we just had skinnier towers like that though I don't think the skyline would look nearly as interesting. In the case of The One, the exterior design perfectly suits the dimensions of the building. Toronto will have a nice, tall and relatively slim tower, but it is nowhere close to what you see in New York. The closest we have to that in Toronto is either the 1200 bay proposal which is only slender from 2 sides or Scotia Plaza which only appears slender from certain angles thanks to an optical illusion.
One of the other major things to know is that the condo towers in the City of Toronto are now limited to 750Sqm max floor plate so there is only so much you can do with that in a tall building, whereas the commercial buildings require large open floorplates and aren't restricted in that sense.
 

Edward Skira

http://skyrisecities.com
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
14,950
Reaction score
15,898
City:
Toronto
We're making friends in high places. Photo by Erik Millette, Tower crane operator.

unnamed.jpg
 

Attachments

  • unnamed-4.jpg
    unnamed-4.jpg
    351.6 KB · Views: 50

Alex_YYC

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 21, 2016
Messages
1,213
Reaction score
8,418
I'm really looking forward to the progress updates on this one. Which tower does everyone think will top 1000' first, Pinnacle or this one?
 
Last edited:

Edward Skira

http://skyrisecities.com
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
14,950
Reaction score
15,898
City:
Toronto
Pinnacle is a hole in the ground. This is set to soar once it passes this complicated area. I'd bet on The One.
 

Top