taal
Senior Member
Our CBD is more alive then most *big* cities I've visted,
Almost everything in the states
London
...
Almost everything in the states
London
...
Toronto 300 Front Street West | 156.05m | 49s | Tridel | Wallman Architects
- Thread starter Northern Light
- Start date
lordmandeep
Banned
very few CBD in North America have any sort of life till 7-8 pm and thats in the winter.
IN the summer, i see people around and about till around 9pm or so..
IN the summer, i see people around and about till around 9pm or so..
adma
Superstar
Does that include the York Club, the Albany Club, the National Club, etc...
Tewder
Senior Member
...or Bymark?
adma
Superstar
MisterF
Senior Member
Well Concord might not have bought it if they couldn't develop the whole parcel. It was a different era - high rise residential wasn't really in demand and office demand was nonexistent. Plus nobody wanted to touch the railway lands. Still, I don't think they should have sold all that land to a single developer. Better to have it grow more organically like the central railway lands, even if it would have taken a few more years.
lol...is that actually your justification for opposing residential?
Edward
Senior Member
The city didn't sell the land the railways did. So the city had no financial interest in whether Concord bought the land. The city should have zoned it as a mixed area. The real estate types could then figure out the cost of the land and whether anyone would buy it or when it would be developed.
scarberiankhatru
Senior Member
It's a small part of the reason why I don't think every single site in the city is suited for condos the way we normally build them. I'd be happy as a clam if this project was residences on top of a hotel or offices or viable retail or anything, similar to MLS...I think Front Street is worth such an effort.
MisterF
Senior Member
Then I stand corrected. And I agree with you. But zoning wouldn't have had enough teeth by itself, it has to be done at the official plan or secondary plan level.
I don't think anyone's saying that ever single site in the city is suited for condos. That's ridiculous. But I do think this site is appropriate. There should be residential mixed into as much of downtown as possible. Mixed use would be just as good but I don't see any reason to require it.
The 16 York site, OTOH, is one where a major commercial component should be required. It's closer to Union Station and it's surrounded by a lot of residential already.
khris
Senior Member
The only US city I've been to after 6pm is Pittsburgh. You should see how dead their downtown is! There is literally no one. It's a dead zone. Toronto's financial district area is pretty busy in the evenings if you ask me. With all the restaurants and with the entertainment district so close to it, how could it not be?
Getting back to the development though, I really hate that they took off the steelwork at the top. That's what made this building look realy awesome. It's lost that and now is much more plain and typical looking.
And the stupid tapering is just ridiculous and unnecessary. Let the skyline grow how it wants!
Getting back to the development though, I really hate that they took off the steelwork at the top. That's what made this building look realy awesome. It's lost that and now is much more plain and typical looking.
And the stupid tapering is just ridiculous and unnecessary. Let the skyline grow how it wants!
lxmoss
Active Member
Just wanted to post an update. This is from the city planner responsible for handling this site.
"We're working with the applicant to try and finalize discussions. If possible, we will be reporting to the May Community Council meeting. We will know for certain within a couple of weeks. So, you might want to check back with me on that date.
If that's the case, a staff report would be available to the public on or about April 30th which is 7 days before the scheduled May 6th meeting."
I will update when I have more details.
"We're working with the applicant to try and finalize discussions. If possible, we will be reporting to the May Community Council meeting. We will know for certain within a couple of weeks. So, you might want to check back with me on that date.
If that's the case, a staff report would be available to the public on or about April 30th which is 7 days before the scheduled May 6th meeting."
I will update when I have more details.
yyzer
Senior Member
Grey Towers over at SSC posted the following last night:
marcus_a_j
Senior Member
^ further to that, meeting will be on May 6 at 10am, committee room 1, 2nd floor, City Hall
EDIT: the same meeting will also be for the L Tower and Burano
EDIT: the same meeting will also be for the L Tower and Burano
Mongo
Senior Member
So about a 22% reduction in height, with a 10% reduction in number of floors. Obviously, most of the height reduction was done by trimming the roof element (as was evident from looking at the 'before' and 'after' renders, anyways).
I had thought that this City-mandated height reduction was ridiculous when I first heard about it, and since then, with all the 35- to 45-storey buildings proposed for just north of it, it looks even more stupid. It will still be the tallest condo in the immediate area, although the margin is a lot smaller than we thought it was a few months ago (as far as we know -- there are still a number of parking lots without announced development plans in the area), but it is dwarfed by the nearby CN Tower, making the whole 'skyline tapering' argument pointless in my opinion.
It still looks very impressive, though.
I had thought that this City-mandated height reduction was ridiculous when I first heard about it, and since then, with all the 35- to 45-storey buildings proposed for just north of it, it looks even more stupid. It will still be the tallest condo in the immediate area, although the margin is a lot smaller than we thought it was a few months ago (as far as we know -- there are still a number of parking lots without announced development plans in the area), but it is dwarfed by the nearby CN Tower, making the whole 'skyline tapering' argument pointless in my opinion.
It still looks very impressive, though.
ProjectEnd
Superstar
/\ Skyline tapering is ridiculous since it's organic. It grows with time and new buildings, not preconceived notions of what a 'skyline' should look like.