Toronto Four Seasons Hotel and Private Residences Toronto | 203.9m | 52s | Lifetime | a—A

The Four Seasons looks quite slender in the second picture.

Does anyone know how many floors away it is from being topped off?
 
steveve said:
yes to the photoshop (if that's what the "edit" is), good job on that one,
impossible to know if Jasonzed approved (lol)! is it me, or does he never post here (aside from pictures)?
Click to expand...

Yes that's and edit done in Photoshop. Thanks :)
He doesn't seem to have anything to say, but if he does his talking through photos, that's okay with me.
 
Automation Gallery said:
At 50 storeys i believe five more if this is true

Four Seasons Development Application

An application has been submitted for the redevelopment of the lands on the east side of Bay Street between Yorkville Avenue and Scollard Street for a mixed-use development consisting of two buildings. One building is a 205 metre (55-storey) hotel-residential tower located at the northeast corner of Bay Street and Yorkville Avenue. The second building is a 125 metre (30-storey) residential tower on the south side of Scollard Street east of Bay Street. Open space is proposed at the southeast corner of the site adjacent to the Fire Station on Yorkville Avenue

More...http://www.toronto.ca/planning/fourseasons.htm#proposal
Click to expand...

Those stats reflect the original proposal prior to the revisions made throughout the approvals process and at the Board. I think the 52 storeys shown in the thread title is still accurate.
 
The second building, which looks as though it is topped out, is short than 1 Yorkville which is only 110M. So I think the stated 125M is probably wrong as well.
 
Four Seasons from Yonge & Wellesley and from above, barely poking above the CIBC tower at Yonge & Bloor

Click on the thumbnail to enlarge, then click again on the image for full size.

 
Four Seasons as seen from the Churchill Park Condos on Spadina Road near St. Clair.

ChurchillP1200953.jpg


ChurchillP1200954.jpg


42
 
wicked sweet angle interchange! ^^^
my god, one sharp looking skyscraper. and unobstructed too! even a low floor gets an amazing view to the east/west/north! mind blowing!
 
aA never faileth - and the glass of this tower reflecteth the sky almost as beautifully as the subtly warmer hues of Bay Adelaide doth.
 
Urban Shocker said:
aA never faileth - and the glass of this tower reflecteth the sky almost as beautifully as the subtly warmer hues of Bay Adelaide doth.
Click to expand...

I think you are slipping further and further into senility. Either that, or deeper and deeper into the bottle. Don't quote me on this, but I would hazard to guess you are the only one who finds your flourished style of bon mots, to be even slightly amusing. The rest of us just sigh and silently shake our heads.

On the Four Seasons front, I am finally seeing this as being tall. Until recently, I wasn't impressed with it's perceived height. I was worried it wasn't going to have the slender proportions the renders, as well as the technical data implied it would.
 
Looking south down Yonge from the Summerhill area this building looks fantastic. The quality of the glass and glazing is terrific, and the slender proportions give the tower a very lofty presence. Certainly going to be the better of the four Lux hotels. One hopes they outdo the Ritz's 'understated elegance' on the inside and go with something a bit more dazzling- it is luxury hotel after all.
 
Traynor said:
I think you are slipping further and further into senility. Either that, or deeper and deeper into the bottle. Don't quote me on this, but I would hazard to guess you are the only one who finds your flourished style of bon mots, to be even slightly amusing. The rest of us just sigh and silently shake our heads.
Click to expand...

I'll quote you on that. Urban Shocker is nearly always worth a laugh, so speak for yourself. Sure (s)he's a bit of a narcisist, but every time you post, I have to look at your backside. Maybe you don't like the competition, but surely there's enough room on the internet for all fetishists.

Not that I don't like your future renders.
 
It is somewhat ironic that such a militant modernist delights so much in using historicist flourishes in his language. No doubt a sign of good taste. ;)

Not that I don't enjoy his comments immensely.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top