Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals - Page 460

WhipperSnapper · #**9181** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 2:35 AM**

What's unusual is not the city presenting their own plan but, the developer not willing to work with it. From a purely height standpoint, Idoubt the OMB will approve anything taller without both sides agreeing as they look at a number of factors that won't help towers twice as tall as anything else in the neighbourhood.

FrankieFlowerpot · #**9182** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 2:42 AM**

caltrane74 · #**9183** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 2:42 AM**

Here is a diagram of the city's plan

]http://farm4.staticflickr.com/3716/11428373303_fcf90e700f_o.jpg

I think the city's plan is too short. 65 to 70 floors works in my opinion. Lets see what the OMB says....

I can see a compromise with a really big development charge for transit and infastructure on the King West Strip.

That way the city can make improvements to accomodate future growth.

Black Star · #**9184** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 2:52 AM**

Mary Shelley's Frankenstein.....

Gresto · #**9185** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:28 AM**

What a joke! Typical Toronto. One can set one's watch by these decisions.

Southcore · #**9186** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 4:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

I think the city's plan is too short. 65 to 70 floors works in my opinion. Lets see what the OMB says....

Agreed. Say they settle on 72, 68 and 64 stories respectively, which gives towers of 242m, 229m and 216m...they'll still look huge since they dwarf the mostly 40ish storey proposed/built/under construction towers nearby. How they meet the street is more important than an extra 30m on each tower. I'd say it's a fair compromise between what M-G and the planners (plus a fat section 37 payment). The only question is the heritage aspects. How much is enough?

WhipperSnapper · #**9187** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 4:56 AM**

This is just planning staff's recommendation. The OMB may still prove unnecessary after tomorrow.

caltrane74 · #**9188** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 5:14 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

This is just planning staff's recommendation. The OMB may still prove unnecessary after tomorrow.

The question now is: Does the city approve, reject or go with the planning staff recommendation?

The Rumour as of Right Now on UT is City Council will approve with only minor variations to the original Mirvish Gerhy Plan.

uzi · #**9189** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 9:05 AM**

if they don't approve I will chop their a..es.

DrNest · #**9190** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 2:32 PM**

These are such unique for Toronto towers that they need to be as tall as originally proposed to truly show their design and have a major impact on the skyline. Even at around 220-235m (ish) they will soon get lost from view. Being closer to the 280-290m range will make them stand out so much more.

How typical of th city to want to cut them down. Canada is a country of lumberjacks, it's trees that need cutting down, not skyscrapers!

WhipperSnapper · #**9191** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:10 PM**

Planners are doing their jobs. These towers grossly exceed the zoning here. The fact that they still have a good chance at approval contradicts everything you say. Torontonians aren't afraid of height.

Our planning process is open to the public. On top of that, zoning is open to amendments. Developers are pushing the envelope everytime. Most other places, they won't bother as they wouldn't have any chance. This whole Toronto this Torontonians that is insular and boorish and unacceptable for a city as cosmopolitan as Toronto.

The tower plans are deserving of special consideration despite deconstructionism, particularly Gehry's brand, is dated in the sense it's innovation peaked a decade or two ago. I continue to have little faith in Mirvish who so far has only shown to flip his father's holdings for profit. Because of the unique nature tied to approval, I really hope the city installs safeguards tieing the zoning amendments to the design.

DrNest · #**9192** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:18 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

The fact that they still have a good chance at approval contradicts everything you say.

How does that contradict everything I say?

I am expressing an opinion regarding the aesthetics of height and the visual impact tall towers in the 280-290m range will have on the skyline. The discussion regarding visual appeal has absolutely nothing to do with whether the towers will actually get approved or not.

koops65 · #**9193** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

On a side note, Eau du Soleil should get final approval from city council today. 63 floors/215 meters and construction to begin soon.

Does anybody know what happened about this?

niwell · #**9194** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:28 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Planners are doing their jobs. These towers grossly exceed the zoning here. The fact that they still have a good chance at approval contradicts everything you say. Torontonians aren't afraid of height.

Our planning process is open to the public. On top of that, zoning is open to amendments. Developers are pushing the envelope everytime. Most other places, they won't bother as they wouldn't have any chance. This whole Toronto this Torontonians that is insular and boorish and unacceptable for a city as cosmopolitan as Toronto.

The tower plans are deserving of special consideration despite deconstructionism, particularly Gehry's brand, is dated in the sense it's innovation peaked a decade or two ago. I continue to have little faith in Mirvish who so far has only shown to flip his father's holdings for profit. Because of the unique nature tied to approval, I really hope the city installs safeguards tieing the zoning amendments to the design.

One of the only sane posts regarding the Mirvish Gehry proposal - thank you!

caltrane74 · #**9195** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by koops65

Does anybody know what happened about this?

Confirmation by the end of the day?

WhipperSnapper · #**9196** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:38 PM**

The city lopping of floors from buildings as some sort of unsubstantiated NIMBY response is the basis of most of you height obsessed posts.

koops65 · #**9197** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 3:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by caltrane74

Confirmation by the end of the day?

But you said that yesterday...

FrankieFlowerpot · #**9198** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 4:10 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by koops65

But you said that yesterday...

There's quite a lot of items at council to be discussed ahead of these development applications - budget issues especially.

If they spent less time dancing at city hall stuff would get done

koops65 · #**9199** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 4:31 PM**

Yes you're right, also long-winded and insincere apologies waste lots of time too.

waterloowarrior · #**9200** Posted **Dec 18, 2013, 8:23 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by koops65

Does anybody know what happened about this?

Community Council's recommendations were adopted by Council. The City solicitor will go to the OMB in support of the revised 63/49 storey plan.

http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.EY29.5