TORONTO | Concord Sky | 301 M / 986 FT | 85 FLOORS

[Miss J]

Didn't Concord keep digging into the basement last year, even when the city ordered them to stop until they have the right permits at 1 point? From what I recall, they blamed the previous developer who were supposed to build this tower on the confusion over the permits. They got the permits months later, but they never really stopped digging, did they?

My point is, and this is pure speculation, what's to stop Concord from reaching close to or exactly 300 metres and then just keep going? Would they dare to do that? And build up to the original proposed height of about 345 metres and simply blame it on confusion over the previous proposal plans of the original developer again.

I'm kinda kidding, but can we really rule out that possibility? Concord marches to their own drum so I just wonder if they really have determined the final height!

[WhipperSnapper]

Concord is not ditching a value engineered design for the more expensive original. The minor foundation permitting issues last year pales in comparison to building 45 metres above the approved envelope. Like racing a stock 1970s Ford Pinto against a Lamborghini Huracan.

There's no reason for developers to rebel. They pretty much reign over planning policy in Toronto. Great for height fetishes. Bad for residents occupying these edifices. Bad for Toronto future as a magnet for people seeking a better quality of life.

[Miss J]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Concord is not ditching a value engineered design for the more expensive original. The minor foundation permitting issues last year pales in comparison to building 45 metres above the approved envelope. Like racing a stock 1970s Ford Pinto against a Lamborghini Huracan.

There's no reason for developers to rebel. They pretty much reign over planning policy in Toronto. Great for height fetishes. Bad for residents occupying these edifices. Bad for Toronto future as a magnet for people seeking a better quality of life.

Thanks, I'm still learning about how all of this works, so it's helpful to know how things really work. I'm watching my city grow and grow and it's amazing! I heard someone on this forum (or UT?) say that maybe the planning dept is easing up with things like height and shadow sometimes now. But if Concord is sticking with the present plan then good for them.

I was just throwing an idea out there and wondering if they would really stray from the approved design, but if not, then that's great!

[Nite]

Originally Posted by Miss J

Didn't Concord keep digging into the basement last year, even when the city ordered them to stop until they have the right permits at 1 point? From what I recall, they blamed the previous developer who were supposed to build this tower on the confusion over the permits. They got the permits months later, but they never really stopped digging, did they?

My point is, and this is pure speculation, what's to stop Concord from reaching close to or exactly 300 metres and then just keep going? Would they dare to do that? And build up to the original proposed height of about 345 metres and simply blame it on confusion over the previous proposal plans of the original developer again.

I'm kinda kidding, but can we really rule out that possibility? Concord marches to their own drum so I just wonder if they really have determined the final height!

The tower is already approved at 301m

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Miss J

Thanks, I'm still learning about how all of this works, so it's helpful to know how things really work. I'm watching my city grow and grow and it's amazing! I heard someone on this forum (or UT?) say that maybe the planning dept is easing up with things like height and shadow sometimes now. But if Concord is sticking with the present plan then good for them.

I was just throwing an idea out there and wondering if they would really stray from the approved design, but if not, then that's great!

Toronto's planning and appeals process has always been willing to accept compromise to make development viable for developers. This has been ratcheted up under the Ford government. This makes Toronto pro development and the claims of Nimbyism on UT, past and present, are mostly to satisfy (height) fetishes over the welfare of the city from growth.

Concord Sky is years away from completion. The current plan is not set in concrete. It ain't over till It's over. Fat lady is not singing yet.

[Miss J]

Originally Posted by Nite

The tower is already approved at 301m

I understand that it's now considered a super-tall on here and CTBUH. I was just wondering if Concord would build higher than approved. And from everything I've heard, the city approved it at about 299 metres officially, which is why we're having a discussion and UT continues to post it at 299 metres, but SSP lists it now at 301. Has the city spoken up about this now, or anyone in their planning dept and said they've changed their minds or made a mistake? Is that what you're referring to? Thanks!

[WhipperSnapper]

The go to for sloped ground floor elevations is the main entrance. Urbantoronto posted an article recently with an exhaustive analysis concluding that the main entrance is, unfortunately, only .2 metres lower than city planning point of reference. That would give the tower a real height of only 299.2 or 299.3 metres. I can't remember if it was 299.0 or 299.1m in the elevations.

City planning needs a point of reference to build a height envelope to process the application. It doesn't have to be the true height of a structure including parapets, etc. They don't look at height like a fan does. Neither does Urbantoronto.

[Miss J]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

The go to for sloped ground floor elevations is the main entrance. Urbantoronto posted an article recently with an exhaustive analysis concluding that the main entrance is, unfortunately, only .2 metres lower than city planning point of reference. That would give the tower a real height of only 299.2 or 299.3 metres. I can't remember if it was 299.0 or 299.1m in the elevations.

City planning needs a point of reference to build a height envelope to process the application. It doesn't have to be the true height of a structure including parapets, etc. They don't look at height like a fan does. Neither does Urbantoronto.

Ok, thanks. That's very helpful and explains it better for me.

[WhipperSnapper]

Took a little look at the plans. I'm confused with UT's main entrance height analysis. There is clearly a geodetic height point of 94.2m outside the main (residential) entrance. (Ref. To Package 3of10 page 4) Established grade is 95.4m. That confirms Concord Sky at 300.4 metres tall.

That UT article over fanboys changing the narrative to make this supertall is more pompous and arrogant than me. And they got it so fucking wrong!

[Miss J]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Took a little look at the plans. I'm confused with UT's main entrance height analysis. There is clearly a geodetic height point of 94.2m outside the main (residential) entrance. (Ref. To Package 3of10 page 4) Established grade is 95.4m. That confirms Concord Sky at 300.4 metres tall.

That UT article over fanboys changing the narrative to make this supertall is more pompous and arrogant than me. And they got it so fucking wrong!

I almost hope Concord asks for a small height increase, even 2 or 3 or 5 metres, just to settle this once and for all for everybody. But like you, I think it's settled and the tower is a supertall.

I think somebody needs to make it official by awarding Concord a kind of public plaque award. Like: "Congratulations On Your Supertall Tower!" Or make it go viral on social media which would settle the issue for good!

[koops65]

I read that article too, and was also confused by it. I have resubmitted my drawing for approval at 300 metres this time.

[koops65]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Took a little look at the plans. I'm confused with UT's main entrance height analysis. There is clearly a geodetic height point of 94.2m outside the main (residential) entrance. (Ref. To Package 3of10 page 4) Established grade is 95.4m. That confirms Concord Sky at 300.4 metres tall.

Is the height 300.4 or 300.3 metres? What you said here is different from the database...

[WhipperSnapper]

300.3 (.27)

[Innsertnamehere]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Took a little look at the plans. I'm confused with UT's main entrance height analysis. There is clearly a geodetic height point of 94.2m outside the main (residential) entrance. (Ref. To Package 3of10 page 4) Established grade is 95.4m. That confirms Concord Sky at 300.4 metres tall.

That UT article over fanboys changing the narrative to make this supertall is more pompous and arrogant than me. And they got it so fucking wrong!

I mean I did the analysis. I did it according to CTBUH definitions, which is to measure from the lowest door to the building. The lowest door to the building is a retail unit, not the residential entrance, and it sits a bit lower than the main residential entrance.

Yea, it'll be wrong if you use a different entrance / definition of height, and ultimately it's approximate without having access to the REVIT / CAD model of the building to actually measure it properly.

[WhipperSnapper]

Lowest entrance is what Maldive interpreted as significant

In the link that you posted it states a significant entrance is," access to one or more primary uses via elevators as opposed to ground floor retail or other uses that solely relate/connect to the adjacent, immediate external environment.

As I already posted, there is no need to measure or approximate. The geodetic height for the ground is provided right outside the main residential entrance. True, The top of the ground floor slab may be slightly off from the point of reference. My interests have always been representing the real height of a building than an official one. A .5 metre solid parapet wall adds real height but, it won't appear in the official calculations.

Most of the world isn't as flat as Toronto so the standard of measured from main entrance was adopted. The article is just insulting calling every editor with a helluva lot more experience than UT's fledgling database editors fanboys.

[Innsertnamehere]

Ahh, I see. It's a difference of 0.2 metres though - not exactly earth shattering for the type of language you are using, and regardless, the primary point of this qualifying as a supertall remains. It's the difference between 300.5m and 300.2 or 300.3m. It's still 300m, and not exactly "wildly wrong".

[Maldive]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

Ahh, I see. It's a difference of 0.2 metres though - not exactly earth shattering for the type of language you are using, and regardless, the primary point of this qualifying as a supertall remains. It's the difference between 300.5m and 300.2 or 300.3m. It's still 300m, and not exactly "wildly wrong".

Zing....!