HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #281  
Old Posted Yesterday, 5:26 PM
TorontoDrew's Avatar
TorontoDrew TorontoDrew is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 9,844
I F@CKING hate that proposal. Leave that building alone.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #282  
Old Posted Yesterday, 7:51 PM
MonkeyRonin's Avatar
MonkeyRonin MonkeyRonin is offline
¥ ¥ ¥
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 10,066
Quote:
Originally Posted by Maldive View Post
Designated building retained, a few more storeys taller, more vertical set-backs to address flight path issues etc.


UT

Not sure that's what I'd call "retained".
__________________
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #283  
Old Posted Yesterday, 8:23 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 22,199
Makes a mockery of designated structures in the name of a couple dozen affordable housing units. No one would agree with retained if this was a more storied designated building like Canada Life or Old City Hall. I don't think Toronto has different levels of heritage designation. It's designated and listed.

This looks more expensive that a ground up tower. I can't see this being built anytime soon. This approval should allow them to convert the office tower whenever that makes sense and without the addition.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada
Forum Jump



Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 3:26 AM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.