Toronto - East Harbour, 4 towers

[koops65]

BUILDING REQUEST FORM
------------------------------

Official sources: http://firstgulf.com/portfolio/east-harbour/
Unofficial sources: http://urbantoronto.ca/database/projects/east-harbour

Building Name: East Harbour 1, East Harbour 2, East Harbour 3, East Harbour 4
Native Name:
Other Names:
Street Address: yet to be determined
City: Toronto
Postal Code:
State/Province: Ontario
Country: Canada
Official Building Website URL: http://firstgulf.com/portfolio/east-harbour/
Wikipedia.org URL:
Skyscrapers.com (Emporis.com) URL:
CTBUH.org URL :
Structurae.de URL:
• Architect: OMA, Adamson Associates
Interesting Facts/Records (in own words): 60 acres
• 11 million sq. feet of Office space, 2 million sq. feet of Retail space
• New Transit Hub
• Floor-to-floor height:
Coordinates (with decimal fraction):

Heights--
PLEASE PROVIDE SOURCES FOR HEIGHTS, OTHERWISE WE WILL ASSUME THEY ARE ESTIMATES AND HEIGHTS NOT BE SHOWN.
Reminder: (Use Meters)
- antenna:
- spire: tower 2 has a Spire, (estimated) height is 220 metres
- roof: (all estimates) tower 1 - 225 metres, tower 2 - 184 metres, tower 3 - 188 metres, tower 4 - 158 metres
- top floor:
- other heights:

Current Building Status (Built, Proposed, Cancelled, Destroyed, etc...): Proposed for all 4 towers

Construction Dates--
- started: 2019 (estimate)
- finished: unknown, site will be built in phases
- destroyed:

Above ground floors: tower 1 - 50, tower 2 - 39, tower 3 - 40, tower 4 - 35
Basement floors:
Gross Floor area:
Unit count:

Structure Type(s): high rise
Building Use(s): Office
Building Style(s):
Building Materials:

[WhipperSnapper]

Not these again. It's way too early. The last ones in the database needed to be deleted because the entire plan was drastically changed. The building designs are still stand-ins. The spire is simply artistic impression.

[LMich]

This is exactly why I refusing to add this. It's way too early in the process. None of these towers are going to look like this. Just because something's been proposed doesn't mean it's instantly worthy of being added to the database.

[koops65]

I'm sitting here shaking my head...

All proposals should be entered into the database if the basic details are known, such as the location and height and # of floors. Even if there is no picture or render or drawing of what the building actually looks like, it should still be entered into the database. That's what the database is for!

Having a drawing to look at is a bonus for everybody concerned... If the details change in the future, then so be it, the details will be adjusted, and the drawing will have to be changed too. I don't see how that's a problem either.

Let me ask you this; Why are there thousands of undrawn buildings??? If we followed your way, none of them should ever have been entered into the database in the first place...

There seem to be multiple editors doing things in multiple ways, and it can get confusing for an illustrator.

[WhipperSnapper]

You don't have firm locations, heights, or number of floors. The proof is in this latest model. There's very little beyond the transit corridor that is similar to the last model. West Harbour can barely be considered a proposal. The individual massing models certainly aren't.

It takes too much time to constantly update proposals that are making their way through zoning. There's also a good chance they will never see the light of day. It's just a waste of time for all of us. If you have the urge to draw than draw some of those missing drawings.