Future Canadian Skylines - Page 153

Gresto · #1 Posted **Mar 24, 2015, 11:08 PM**

Nice work, Insertnamehere! Thanks for that. Also missing, of course, is Oxford Place, but no one knows what's really happening there yet.

WhipperSnapper · #2 Posted **Mar 24, 2015, 11:29 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gresto

Nice work, Insertnamehere! Thanks for that. Also missing, of course, is Oxford Place, but no one knows what's really happening there yet.

Let it go.

WhipperSnapper · #3 Posted **Mar 24, 2015, 11:25 PM**

Would expect to see more yellow on these maps. Could be a big year in that regard.

Innsertnamehere · #4 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 1:57 AM**

Oxford place is dead. I deleted a long time ago from the model. If it comes back, I'll put it in, but right now it is as dead as the Sapphire tower as far as I am concerned. They never even filed an application to the city for it for christs sake..

The amount of yellow is about normal, but there have been a bunch of proposals added recently. The colours always shift around a lot in the spring, lots of yellows switch to blue, reds switch to yellow, etc.

Give it 3 months and there will be a lot less red most likely.

caltrane74 · #5 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 12:07 PM**

I'm sure we won't have to wait much longer for a re-imagined vision of Oxford Place to emerge from the developers. There is a lot of redevelopment potential at the Convention Centre, hell that's why Oxford bought the place. The old Oxford Place proposal was testament to the scale of redevelopment that is possible at that place. I wouldn't be surprised to see something released before the end of the year that doesn't even touch the convention centre and still ends up easily over 1000 feet/300 meters.

WhipperSnapper · #6 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 1:28 PM**

There's are dozens of sites with much greater development potential with owners actively looking to tap into that potential. The current improvements, if any, aren't generating nearly as much revenue as the convention centre property. The only reason people continue to cling to Oxford Place is because of a couple renderings developed to express the potential to the city by allowing casinos. Of course, a resort of this magnitude as depicted in these renderings would be extremely unlikely even if the city said yes. We aren't Las Vegas or Macao.

My point being, you can't go by anything you have seen in regards to this site. Let it go. Otherwise, you are just setting yourself up for major disappointment because I know height trumps all to those that continue to dream of it.

FrankieFlowerpot · #7 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 1:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I'm sure we won't have to wait much longer for a re-imagined vision of Oxford Place to emerge from the developers. There is a lot of redevelopment potential at the Convention Centre, hell that's why Oxford bought the place. The old Oxford Place proposal was testament to the scale of redevelopment that is possible at that place. I wouldn't be surprised to see something released before the end of the year that doesn't even touch the convention centre and still ends up easily over 1000 feet/300 meters.

As WS says

• Video Link

Gresto · #8 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 9:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by FrankieFlowerpot

As WS says

I say "Nay!" to that twaddle. Luba's "Let It Go" is more my style. '80s music forever!

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Otherwise, you are just setting yourself up for major disappointment because I know height trumps all to those that continue to dream of it.

Poppycock. Height doesn't trump all. That seems to be your stock supercilious accusation against anyone who laments the loss of a tall Toronto skyscraper. I fully admit to being something of a height junkie (isn't that outlandish on a site called Skyscraperpage!), and I liked the designs we saw some time ago (whether official or not), but I positively don't support height at any expense, certainly not of reason. Personally, I did not like the location of the main towers, as they would have substantially blocked CN Tower sightlines.

Prometheus · #9 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 9:56 PM**

I was shocked when Toronto politicians shot down the casino and the big city development and amenities it could have supported. Such a Vancouver move.

WhipperSnapper · #10 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 10:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Prometheus

I was shocked when Toronto politicians shot down the casino and the big city development and amenities it could have supported. Such a Vancouver move.

What do you mean by big city development and amenities?

WhipperSnapper · #11 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 10:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gresto

I say "Nay!" to that twaddle. Luba's "Let It Go" is more my style. '80s music forever!

Poppycock. Height doesn't trump all. That seems to be your stock supercilious accusation against anyone who laments the loss of a tall Toronto skyscraper. I fully admit to being something of a height junkie (isn't that outlandish on a site called Skyscraperpage!), and I liked the designs we saw some time ago (whether official or not), but I positively don't support height at any expense, certainly not of reason. Personally, I did not like the location of the main towers, as they would have substantially blocked CN Tower sightlines.

Hey, I'm just trying to keep things grounded here to prevent a pitchfork carrying mob from descending on City Hall.

My post was in response to Caltranes. I don't really want to go further into explanation. I care.

mistercorporate · #12 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 2:11 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I'm sure we won't have to wait much longer for a re-imagined vision of Oxford Place to emerge from the developers. There is a lot of redevelopment potential at the Convention Centre, hell that's why Oxford bought the place. The old Oxford Place proposal was testament to the scale of redevelopment that is possible at that place. I wouldn't be surprised to see something released before the end of the year that doesn't even touch the convention centre and still ends up easily over 1000 feet/300 meters.

Regardless of how long it takes (2 years, 10 years), this proposal is coming back and will be constructed in one form or another, it just makes sense.
I refuse to let it go!

WhipperSnapper · #13 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 3:05 PM**

"one form or another"

exactly.

LeftCoaster · #14 Posted **Mar 25, 2015, 9:18 PM**

Like we've all been saying for quite some time now; Oxford Place as it was shown last year is not going to happen.

Of course at some point something can be built on the site, but it's back to square one as far as the development is concerned.

Chadillaccc · #15 Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 4:11 AM**

Is decking over the tracks something being seriously considered in Toronto? I'd love to see it here. The tracks are like a scar through the city.

Innsertnamehere · #16 Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 9:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chadillaccc

Is decking over the tracks something being seriously considered in Toronto? I'd love to see it here. The tracks are like a scar through the city.

45 Bay is starting construction in a few months and will include a park over the tracks.

Chadillaccc · #17 Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 4:12 AM**

The highest def and most accurate render released so far of the future of the East Village, including most currently proposed/UC buildings east of fourth street. Much of the west side is excluded.

http://www.calgarymlc.ca/block39rfp

TallBob · #18 Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 5:13 AM**

Nice renders Chad... Very boring buildings though!

Chadillaccc · #19 Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 5:25 AM**

I find the XYC, Evolution, and Riverhouse buildings to be quite lovely actually, but yes otherwise quite boring. Not every building can be a masterpiece though, nor should they be. The EV is already getting two masterpieces in the National Music Centre of Canada and the New Central Library, so for now it's doing pretty good so far.

LeftCoaster · #20 Posted **Mar 26, 2015, 6:53 PM**

National Music Centre is a masterpiece? When did the redesign happen?