Responsible? To whom? How? Planning in either locales aren't exactly known for accountability. Sorry but there is more to building in a city than just satisifying someone's urges for the tallest structure.PS: Responsible People in King-Kong and especially in Dubai do not have that phobia
PS: I think you meant Hong Kong.
Dubai is certainly not producing a livable, walkable city. In terms of urban planning, it is a disaster.
This is sad...
Learn Here the Secrets of Toronto's World Famous Skyscraper Boom! TorontoSkyscraperBlog.com
Toronto's climate, population, public transit, NIMBYism, surban-mentality and the slower rate of project development serve as huge hinderances in comparison.
I guess no one attended the public presentation about this project last night at Metro Hall? Apparently there were some preliminary presentations from the developers about this project, one on portland street, and another on another street I don't recall (started with a c I believe, and no it was not charlotte).
Adam Vaughn was of course there too. I'm curious what was discussed...
I always wonder the logic of having buildings taper down in height when where they are tapering down to has no significance. I doubt in 10 years they are going to be able to keep using that logic when all the available land is dwindling
A shorter building here means that the condo will be an even less appropriate use of the site.
Even though I'm against Toronto becoming overcrowded and polluted like Hong Kong or a vertical non-city like Dubai, I really don't understand the planners' logic here. The site can't be more than 100 meters from the CN Tower for crying out loud! It seems like this building at its original height would be less out of scale with its surroundings than the TIFF with its.
Agreed DTGeek, and when they complain about afternoon winter shadows in Nathon Phillips Square how small town are some of these people at city hall? Not that this building is, but who will want to build an iconic building in this city if it can't even be seen. I still think in height terms anything goes if it's in or near the core providing we get a decent podium. The fact somebody wants to build next to a transfer station should give them bonus points, the fact they came up with a classy design should have been even more reason to let them have what they want. It's not as thought TIFF's Tower portion is anything cutting edge and in Vancouver terms view cone worthy.
On a side note, 5 years ago 50 floors for a condo would have made most of us giddy.