Toronto 88 Scott Street | 203.9m | 58s | Concert | P + S / IBI

wolfewood said:
I can't give a precise answer but I'd argue probably not. Internationally I imagine some of the bombed out cities in Europe and Asia, as well as heavily redeveloped ones (especially in East Asia) have lost virtually all their pre-WWII buildings in some areas. In North America I'd say Toronto is still pretty average (though I'm also gauging from my own perception, so take this with a grain of salt). Detroit has been massacred, large parts of Manhattan have been redeveloped (even if a good deal of the original stock does remain, look at the Lower East Side or the other housing projects that clear cut whole swathes of the city) and I've even seen the Montreal forumers (on SSP and Mtlurb) bemoan how much Montreal lost. Halifax is another Canadian city that has seen a lot of it's pre-WWII buildings destroyed too, as has Hamilton. And finally, from my own perspective, I'd argue Guelph is a pretty sad example of old buildings being destroyed to "modernize" the downtown (or from fires). The loss of the Carnegie Library, the YMCA building and the Post Office (as well as Quebec Street and St. George's Square) did a lot to destroy downtown Guelph and have left it a hulk of its former self. The fact it's as vibrant as it is is actually really impressive considering how much of it was destroyed over the years.
Click to expand...

Most of those destroyed European cities actually rebuilt their old heritage buildings from scratch though, unlike here where our collective ambivalence seems to just give up and say "oh well".
 
ChesterCopperpot said:
What used to be ...

QPyxDHQ.jpg
Click to expand...

Amazing - I've never seen this picture before. Yet another tragic, and most likely, preventable loss.
 
Towered said:
Most of those destroyed European cities actually rebuilt their old heritage buildings from scratch though, unlike here where our collective ambivalence seems to just give up and say "oh well".
Click to expand...

Depends on the city (London didn't but Warsaw did) but fair point.

I suspect the reason we don't in North America is because the loss of heritage buildings is seen as a tragedy but a minor one. Whereas European cities were destroyed in cataclysmic and horrifying ways. So the rebuilding was a chance to return before the devastation of WWII. North Americans just don't have that need to rebuild. Plus, we rarely put any real money or effort into historicist architecture and the result is invariably bland or disgusting. However tiring modernism can get, it still beats the kinds of slop we get in historicist buildings.
 
wolfewood said:
Depends on the city (London didn't but Warsaw did) but fair point.

I suspect the reason we don't in North America is because the loss of heritage buildings is seen as a tragedy but a minor one. Whereas European cities were destroyed in cataclysmic and horrifying ways. So the rebuilding was a chance to return before the devastation of WWII. North Americans just don't have that need to rebuild. Plus, we rarely put any real money or effort into historicist architecture and the result is invariably bland or disgusting. However tiring modernism can get, it still beats the kinds of slop we get in historicist buildings.
Click to expand...
There's plenty of middle ground between faux historicism and modernism. Unfortunately, many of our local architects are cut from the same cloth and repeat the same hackneyed designs, over and over.
 
About to start to impact the skyline in a big way.

IMG_7485.JPG
 

Attachments

  • IMG_7485.JPG
    IMG_7485.JPG
    333.8 KB · Views: 1,219
Having a hard time seeing if that's cream, or white with a pale light on it.

42
 
Taken January 27, 2016:


17th Floor?







According to The Skyscraper Centre website, 88 Scott St. will top off at 669 feet. By comparison, the roof height of 181 Bay Street (the north Brookfield Place tower) is 679 feet, and Commerce Court West is 784 feet tall. So on completion, the roofline of 88 Scott Street will appear from this angle to be just shy of the rooftops of 181 Bay and the black TD Tower, and about 6 floors below the CIBC logo atop Commerce Court West.

 
Last edited:
taal said:
I really doubt the statement that Toronto has lost more than its share of building from time period ... is really true !
Click to expand...
WO
Razz said:
Taken January 27, 2016:


17th Floor?







According to The Skyscraper Centre website, 88 Scott St. will top off at 669 feet. By comparison, the roof height of 181 Bay Street (the north Brookfield Place tower) is 679 feet, and Commerce Court West is 784 feet tall. So on completion, the roofline of 88 Scott Street will appear from this angle to be just shy of the rooftops of 181 Bay and the black TD Tower, and about 6 floors below the CIBC logo atop Commerce Court West.

Click to expand...
WOW!! Amazing picture!!!
 
ptbotrmpfn said:
Roughly the top of where 181 's shadow is casting there onto Commerce Court?
Click to expand...

If the building heights reported in The Skyscraper Centre website are accurate, then 88 Scott Street's highest roof line (it has a staggered roof profile - see East Elevation rendering in post #1236) should line up with the bottom of 181 Bay Street's mechanical penthouse. So to your shadow analogy, and using CCW as the backdrop, 88 Scott Street will top out approximately three (3) CCW floors above the shadow and/or 6 CCW office floors below the CIBC logo (clear as mud, right?).
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top