[ProjectEnd]

It's the designer's choice. While some here are clearly bothered by it, others see mechanical penthouses as fundamental pieces of a building deserving of their own treatment. It varies from building to building, client to client and architect to architect.

 

[ProjectEnd]

The green mechanical cladding is just painful.

We have been told by Brad that it is not permanent. That said, I'm not sure how things can change short of removing some sort of film or changing out the glass entirely.

 

[E.B.]

We have been told by Brad that it is not permanent. That said, I'm not sure how things can change short of removing some sort of film or changing out the glass entirely.

I hope so. It is painful to look at.

 

[officedweller]

can someone explain to an engineering/architecture noob why these mechanical boxes always have to sit awkwardly on top of the structure instead of being seamlessly built into the form of the building?

There's also the added cost of constructing additional structure to the edge of the highest occupiable floor.
Also, if that part of the roof is enclosed, would that count towards the FSR?
If so, the developer wouldn't want such "wasted space".

 

[ProjectEnd]

You mean FSI? Things like mechanical / electrical areas, stairs, etc. are not included in the GFA calculation so no, they do not count towards the FSI.

 

[Lost In The Wilds]

Any idea why the bands don't protrude from the mechanical box, as was originally intended? Would it really be that difficult to execute? The current look really ruins this tower for me.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Any idea why the bands don't protrude from the mechanical box, as was originally intended? Would it really be that difficult to execute? The current look really ruins this tower for me.

Wow. Hyperbole much?

 

[Lost In The Wilds]

Wow. Hyperbole much?

Nope. The tower is still obviously high quality, but the dropped mechanical bands makes it look odd to me. Additionally, I'm annoyed that the metal screen was dropped from the podium glass and of course the elimination of the water feature.

 

[Marcanadian]

Theatre Park by Marcanadian, on Flickr

Theatre Park by Marcanadian, on Flickr

Theatre Park by Marcanadian, on Flickr

Toronto by Marcanadian, on Flickr

Richmond Street by Marcanadian, on Flickr

 

[interchange42]

Any idea why the bands don't protrude from the mechanical box, as was originally intended? Would it really be that difficult to execute? The current look really ruins this tower for me.

I agree that this was a better look, but does this really look like it would have been possible to execute without more supporting structure? Something was going to have to be beefed up to make it stand up in any weather, and I can't imagine that the reality would have been quite as elegant as the concept.

We are ending up with second best up top here, but that's still pretty good compared to most buildings in this city.

42

 

[Lost In The Wilds]

I agree that this was a better look, but does this really look like it would have been possible to execute without more supporting structure? Something was going to have to be beefed up to make it stand up in any weather, and I can't imagine that the reality would have been quite as elegant as the concept.

We are ending up with second best up top here, but that's still pretty good compared to most buildings in this city.

42

I'm sure there is a way that the protruding bands could have been pulled off, while remaining elegant. Why bother making all these renderings and not sticking true to the original concept? This sort of things drives me up the wall. This compromise reminds me of a quote from Peter Freed re his waterfront proposal: "There is nothing that could not be worked out here. People flew to the moon in a space ship, so I'm sure we could figure out how to get a ship or two in and out of the sugar plant. If we can't we should all be embarrassed." (from this article: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life/home-and-garden/real-estate/torontos-waterfront-reimagined/article4315078/

With the creative minds in this city, why couldn't this have worked out, true to the renderings?

 

[interchange42]

It would come down to the cost of doing it too of course. When the renderings are created, nothing at that point is costed. All of that comes later in the process as units sell and the architectural drawings are created. Brad Lamb was not willing to go on record at first as to whether these bands would be frit on the glass or aluminum (as they turned out to be). So he manages to make it work where they are attached to the skin of the building, but not above that. There will be a reason, and it likely has to do with how the bands would need to be supported up around the mechanical box, what it would have looked like, and what it would have cost.

I'd rather have buildings, generally, completed as rendered too. It doesn't always happen. We throw around the term The Cheapening™ on UT when it happens occasionally, but I'm not certain that money was the only reason in this case, so I'm reticent to invoke the term here.

42

 

[AndreaPalladio]

With the creative minds in this city, why couldn't this have worked out, true to the renderings?

The rendering is not the design. The rendering is an impression of how a design might look. It's used for sales. It's not a promise, nor a contract.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

The rendering is not the design. The rendering is an impression of how a design might look. It's used for sales. It's not a promise, nor a contract.

This needs to be posted every time a new render appears on this board

 

[Lost In The Wilds]

The rendering is not the design. The rendering is an impression of how a design might look. It's used for sales. It's not a promise, nor a contract.

But why include those bands in the first place? You'd think any complications would have been taken into account before releasing images of what the crown might look like? Does anyone here know Brad Lamb personally? I'd like to hear from him why this wasn't possible. Not to mention the metal screen at the tower's base and the water feature. At the very least, those aspects of the design could easily come to fruition, but for some reason they are no longer part of the plan. Re the water feature -- couldn't the dip in the ground just be eliminated -- leaving the water to fall into a drain, directly up against the water wall? Though the small pond would have been nice, the waterfall could still work without it, and more room would be available for pedestrians. I just don't understand why that alternative isn't being considered -- especially when this project's forecourt was inspired by Paley Park. Here's a closeup shot of the Paley Park water feature:

Notice the proximity of the basin to the falling water? This is precisely what should be done at Theatre Park.