Ramako
Moderator
There is no universal height limit. In fact, the original proposal for Trump Tower was over 1000 ft, but it was shortened due to weak sales. Toronto will eventually get a 1000 footer, when the market dictates it.
|
|
|
400 foot List
- Thread starter DaninToronto
- Start date
There is no universal height limit. In fact, the original proposal for Trump Tower was over 1000 ft, but it was shortened due to weak sales. Toronto will eventually get a 1000 footer, when the market dictates it.
Mongo
Senior Member
The decision to build a 300+ metre (1000+ foot) building is almost always made for other reasons than financial return, since buildings that tall are almost never economically justifiable. (Maybe in the densest parts of New York or Hong Kong, but rarely elsewhere.) A much larger factor is the perceived prestige that goes with a "supertall".
I think that this is why there are so many supertalls proposed or under construction in the "peripheral" countries such as Panama or the U.A.E. or even the Republic of China, rather than in established powers like the USA or Canada.
It comes down the fact that the construction movers and shakers in Toronto feel no need to inflate their egos with supertalls. If one is built in Toronto it will be because building it will be the financially correct decision to make.
I think that this is why there are so many supertalls proposed or under construction in the "peripheral" countries such as Panama or the U.A.E. or even the Republic of China, rather than in established powers like the USA or Canada.
It comes down the fact that the construction movers and shakers in Toronto feel no need to inflate their egos with supertalls. If one is built in Toronto it will be because building it will be the financially correct decision to make.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Yeah, but then again here in Toronto the financial correct decision could be as simple as marketing the tallest condo building in Canada.
Solaris
Senior Member
Automation Gallery
Superstar
that's exactly what AURA has been doing
Right, and pretty successful..but then again it still does not stop some one else in the near future from coming along and proposing/marketing a 300+ meter building because it is financial correct to rule the sky. Ill bet it will happen in the next couple of years..
maestro
Senior Member
I can't think of two many sites which do not fall under shadowing restrictions and are costly enough to a developer to justify building supertall. I also don't see the price per square foot of land rising to the same degree as the past few years despite ready to build lots are rapidly decreasing. A supertall would undoubtably be around 800 to 1000 units. Arranging financing even with sufficient sales would be a massive endeavour and create unnecessary delays for developers that are in the business to turnover their projects as quickly as possible. I could go on ...
There's a decent chance but, it won't be as dependant on how many units you can sell as most seem to think.
There's a decent chance but, it won't be as dependant on how many units you can sell as most seem to think.
DaninToronto
Active Member
If anyone notices and mistakes or omissions, height changes, name changes etc. please let me know!
I try my best, but I miss a lot
Thanks
I try my best, but I miss a lot
Thanks
Build Up
Active Member
1 bloor should be 240m (787 ft) with the height increase
EDIT: Ice 1 is 234.4m (769ft) Ice 2 is 202.2m (663ft)
EDIT: Ice 1 is 234.4m (769ft) Ice 2 is 202.2m (663ft)
Last edited:
DaninToronto
Active Member
Updated! Thanks
Ramako
Moderator
Just curious; where are you getting those numbers for One Bloor from?
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Its called calculations, he may be a couple meters off, but close enough...original height to the roofline on 65 storeys was 218.6 meters, now you do the math on 70 storeys.
Ramako
Moderator
I did the math and got approximately 235 metres. That's why I'm wondering how he came to a different number.
DaninToronto
Active Member
Usually why I tend to avoid putting estimates. No one really knows. Are Ice 1 and 2 estimates or do we have a source?
Mongo
Senior Member
From this Committee of Adjustment report, page 14:
Map 8, By-law 494-2009
The maximum permitted height of Building B (PARCEL ONE) is 186 m.
Building B will have a height of 202 m.
The maximum permitted height of Building A (PARCEL TWO) is 216 m.
Building A will have a height of 234.4 m.
Map 8, By-law 494-2009
The maximum permitted height of Building B (PARCEL ONE) is 186 m.
Building B will have a height of 202 m.
The maximum permitted height of Building A (PARCEL TWO) is 216 m.
Building A will have a height of 234.4 m.
DarkSideDenizen
Senior Member
I was just going over some figures and considering the scale of the recent construction boom in Toronto:
Prior to 2005 there were: 33 buildings over 400'
Current + proposals: 122 buildings over 400', or an increase of nearly 300%.
Prior to 2005 there were: 10 buildings over 500'
Current + proposals: 50 buildings over 500', or an increase of 400%.
Quite amazing, with many more announcements to come I'm sure.
I vaguely recall agonizing over the start date for the Bay Adelaide centre back in the early 90's. Even the construction of 2 Queen St. East (Maritime Life/Manulife) in 2001-2003 was seemingly big news at the time. How things have changed. Enjoy it while it lasts.
Prior to 2005 there were: 33 buildings over 400'
Current + proposals: 122 buildings over 400', or an increase of nearly 300%.
Prior to 2005 there were: 10 buildings over 500'
Current + proposals: 50 buildings over 500', or an increase of 400%.
Quite amazing, with many more announcements to come I'm sure.
I vaguely recall agonizing over the start date for the Bay Adelaide centre back in the early 90's. Even the construction of 2 Queen St. East (Maritime Life/Manulife) in 2001-2003 was seemingly big news at the time. How things have changed. Enjoy it while it lasts.