SkyscraperPage Forum

SkyscraperPage Forum (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/index.php)
-   Proposals (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/forumdisplay.php?f=361)
-   -   TORONTO l 350 Bloor East | 209m | 63s | Osmington Gerofsky | Hariri Pontarini (https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/showthread.php?t=251982)

Maldive Aug 18, 2022 3:34 AM

TORONTO l 350 Bloor East | 209m | 63s | Osmington Gerofsky | Hariri Pontarini
 
350 Bloor East | 208.91m | 63s | Osmington Gerofsky | Hariri Pontarini l pre-construction

Such a classy addition to Bloor Street East. Great stuff from HPA (office, residential and retail). Retains the unique concrete exterior of the 6 storey Parkin-designed office building. I’d take half a dozen of these downtown ;-).

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/...95-147590.jpeg
UT

https://urbantoronto.ca/forum/attach...0k-jpg.421060/
UT

Great addition to the 200 metre club.

jackster99 Aug 18, 2022 3:56 PM

^It's amazing to me how polar opposites NYC and Toronto are when it comes to tear downs.

For new developments in NYC, anything that gets in the way gets torn down, no matter how beautiful or special. I've seen buildings torn down in NYC that would be the crown jewel, star of the show in many cities.

Meanwhile, Toronto seems to save EVERYTHING to incorporate into the new tower. Which in many cases is a good thing, and I wish NYC would learn a lesson from. But I'm sorry, does that 6 story Rogers building really need to be saved and incorporated for this development? Unless I'm missing something, seems like it definitely does not need to be preserved.

Innsertnamehere Aug 18, 2022 4:05 PM

NYC has so much more historic building stock that heritage designations are reserved for basically only the true landmarks, arguably as it really should be.

Toronto's heritage regime comparatively has much less to "preserve" as the city is so much newer, so basically everything over 50 years old gets a heritage designation, and that designation only protects the facade of the structure.

Honestly I agree that a more restrained heritage approach only protecting the most significant buildings but with quite strong protections instead (i.e. no facadism) would probably be a better approach overall.

Remember that Toronto was smaller than Buffalo until the late 1940's..

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/...6216-19900.jpg
https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/08...y-toronto-1930

tdawg Aug 18, 2022 4:15 PM

That's not entirely true, jackster99. The new Steinway Tower preserves the landmarked 1925 Steinway Hall in its base and of course the Hearst Tower was built on top of the old pedestal.

https://images.squarespace-cdn.com/c...G?format=1500w

jackster99 Aug 18, 2022 4:33 PM

Thanks for the informative answer, innsertnamehere. And that is wild to think about, regarding the comparison to Buffalo. Makes Toronto's insane growth in less than 80 years all that more impressive. Quickly closing in on being the second best skyline in North America, by some metrics it's already there.

And yes you are right tdwag, there have been some that have been saved, but it's rare and the exception to the norm, especially compared to Toronto.

Just to name a few, the Bancroft Building, Rizzoli Bookstore, Calvary Baptist, and Trinity Court tear downs have all occurred in the last few years, and they were all heartbreaking. Made even worse that they will be replaced by buildings that aren't that special. If they had made way for starchitect designed supertalls, that would have been another matter.

tdawg Aug 18, 2022 5:48 PM

Rizzoli was a huge loss. I do applaud the city and state for the foresight to save the old post office for the Moynihan Train Hall.

Maldive Aug 18, 2022 11:28 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jackster99 (Post 9705851)
^It's amazing to me how polar opposites NYC and Toronto are when it comes to tear downs.

For new developments in NYC, anything that gets in the way gets torn down, no matter how beautiful or special. I've seen buildings torn down in NYC that would be the crown jewel, star of the show in many cities.

Meanwhile, Toronto seems to save EVERYTHING to incorporate into the new tower. Which in many cases is a good thing, and I wish NYC would learn a lesson from. But I'm sorry, does that 6 story Rogers building really need to be saved and incorporated for this development? Unless I'm missing something, seems like it definitely does not need to be preserved.

I think most local fans of brutalism consider this little 1970's office building designed John Parkin to be important.

Bear in mind that 3 facades are being saved, with an all new build inside.

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/...95-147592.jpeg
UT

I'm not a huge fan of brutalism (we have some brutal brutalist buildings), except for the ManuLife Centre (aka BMO) down the street.

https://cc-production-uploads-bucket...ic-mainweb.jpg
Link

:)

Nouvellecosse Aug 19, 2022 12:54 AM

I think in Toronto, preservation isn't just about preserving the particular building in question but more about retaining architectural diversity and texture more generally such that you won't have as many stretches of repetitive, cold, corporate-looking streetscapes. This is of particular concern in the financial district where modern office towers are very tightly packed, but it can apply to other areas with high rates of new development as well. In this case, the brutalist building is unremarkable but likely more interesting than whatever they'd have come up with for the building podium should it be torn down.

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere (Post 9705861)
NYC has so much more historic building stock that heritage designations are reserved for basically only the true landmarks, arguably as it really should be.

Toronto's heritage regime comparatively has much less to "preserve" as the city is so much newer, so basically everything over 50 years old gets a heritage designation, and that designation only protects the facade of the structure.

Honestly I agree that a more restrained heritage approach only protecting the most significant buildings but with quite strong protections instead (i.e. no facadism) would probably be a better approach overall.

Remember that Toronto was smaller than Buffalo until the late 1940's..

Yeah that sounds like it's probably the best approach.

koops65 Aug 19, 2022 2:01 AM

Video Link


[IMG]https://i.imgur.com/EogXdDW.png[/IMG]

softee Aug 20, 2022 6:22 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere (Post 9705861)

Remember that Toronto was smaller than Buffalo until the late 1940's..

https://cdn.skyrisecities.com/sites/...6216-19900.jpg
https://urbantoronto.ca/news/2012/08...y-toronto-1930

Love that pic! I believe Toronto surpassed Buffalo in population in the early 1920s.


All times are GMT. The time now is 7:19 PM.

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.