Toronto 88 Scott Street | 203.9m | 58s | Concert | P + S / IBI

DSC said:
Here's the City staff's preliminary comments on 40 Scott. Coming to TEYCC next week: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2011/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-38813.pdf
Click to expand...

I see from the report that once again the street trees are sacrificed. Those trees make that part of Scott absolutely lovely. It's a damn shame...and they are not Honey Locusts. They're Shademaster Locusts. (though I have been known to be wrong on extreme rare occasions)
It was awful to see the beautiful mature birches on Scott St. come down to make way for the temporary dressing rooms for the Sony Centre. The same for lower Church when they wacked out a whole block of mature trees for the Bersczy.
Maybe it's just crankiness in my old age, but I can't help being a little skeptical. Is it always absolutely necessary to do this or is really just out of convenience.
 
Looking south from King St.

40scottsouth.jpg
 
Granny said:
I see from the report that once again the street trees are sacrificed. Those trees make that part of Scott absolutely lovely. It's a damn shame...and they are not Honey Locusts. They're Shademaster Locusts. (though I have been known to be wrong on extreme rare occasions)
It was awful to see the beautiful mature birches on Scott St. come down to make way for the temporary dressing rooms for the Sony Centre. The same for lower Church when they wacked out a whole block of mature trees for the Bersczy.
Maybe it's just crankiness in my old age, but I can't help being a little skeptical. Is it always absolutely necessary to do this or is really just out of convenience.
Click to expand...

I'm with you 100% on how you feel about the trees you mention but I'm sure if they didn't absolutely have to be removed, they wouldn't be. The City saved a few trees around X, X2 and Casa during construction (a few also came down) when in fact a few of the one's that got saved look to me like they should have been put out of their misery and replaced with younger, more attractive trees that would have matured better.
What also gets my goat are trees along streets that die. They sit dead, or sawed off for sometimes as long as two or three years before they are replaced. Worse still, trees that die along heavily trafficked areas that get chopped off below ground level and cement poured over top. That's the ultimate insult.
 
Granny said:
I see from the report that once again the street trees are sacrificed. Those trees make that part of Scott absolutely lovely. It's a damn shame...and they are not Honey Locusts. They're Shademaster Locusts. (though I have been known to be wrong on extreme rare occasions)
It was awful to see the beautiful mature birches on Scott St. come down to make way for the temporary dressing rooms for the Sony Centre. The same for lower Church when they wacked out a whole block of mature trees for the Bersczy.
Maybe it's just crankiness in my old age, but I can't help being a little skeptical. Is it always absolutely necessary to do this or is really just out of convenience.
Click to expand...


i say convenience ...
unfortunately, even if the trees were left there, the construction would cause damage to the root system and the mature trees would eventually die.
 
Parkdalian said:
There's a bylaw in place to prevent unnecessary tree removal. They have to apply for a permit to show the removal of the trees is necessary in order to facilitate construction:

http://www.toronto.ca/trees/private_trees.htm
Click to expand...

Yup. Figure there has to be some kind of process in place or otherwise we would have glassy eyed giggling idiots with chainsaws scurrying around all over the place. The old sceptisism is still there though. How much investigative 'show us how you have explored every other possible option' efforts are applied to granting one of these permits or is it just some yawning desk clerk with a freshly inked rubber stamp.
 
Last edited:
Its stuff like this that you have a hard time understanding where these guys (DCN) are coming from..:confused::rolleyes:

The project will include demolition of the existing seven-storey structure on the site and reuse of the stone cladding for the new podium, an additional two storeys will be added to the existing building.

CONDOMINIUM, RETAIL BUILDING
Proj: 9138225-1
Toronto, Metro Toronto Reg ON

NEGOTIATED/PLANNING
40 Scott St, 10 Wellington St E, M5E 1L5
$28,000,000 est

Note:... This project is preliminary. Owner is seeking city council rezoning approvals. A Public Information Centre (PIC) is anticipated fall 2011. Concept plans are ongoing. Schedules for working drawings, sub trade tender and construction are undetermined pending approvals. Further update early 2012.

Project:...proposed construction of a 58-storey condominium building with a 53-storey tower above a five storey podium. There will be 513 residential units in 525,000 sq ft, with 8,000 sq ft of retail space at grade. The project will include demolition of the existing seven-storey structure on the site and reuse of the stone cladding for the new podium, an additional two storeys will be added to the existing building. 11,528 sq ft of amenity spaces are proposed for the ground floor, the sixth floor, on floors 15 and 16 and on floors 46 and 47. Outdoor amenity space is located on the roof of the five-storey podium along Wellington St E, and will connect directly to the amenity area on the sixth floor. There will be seven storeys of below grade parking for 362 spaces.

Scope:...252,000 square feet; 58 storeys; 7 storeys below grade; 513 units; parking for 362 cars; 1 acres
Development:..New

http://dcnonl.com/cgi-bin/top10.pl?...db7ddda973f8&projectid=9138225&region=ontario
 
They really should double check their new releases. Unless they actually have a source thats telling them that "two storeys will be added to the existing building" and the building will quickly be demolished afterwards lol.
 
After reviewing the elevations again, I'm a little bit concerned about the north and south elevations. In particular towards the top half of the building the glass (presumably) seems to protrude out whereas it would seem that setbacks would make more sense. That feels messy and a bit sloppy to me.

You can kind of see where I'm referring to in the below image where I have darkened it a bit
40-scott-street.gif
 
cassius said:
After reviewing the elevations again, I'm a little bit concerned about the north and south elevations. In particular towards the top half of the building the glass (presumably) seems to protrude out whereas it would seem that setbacks would make more sense. That feels messy and a bit sloppy to me.
Click to expand...

I don't think you need to worry - check out the roof plan provided. It has the floor count for each setback and shows that the protruding glass that you pointed out does in fact have setbacks. The two thick lines on the elevation would be where it's set back.

I think the proportions of this building will be nice, but the inevitable pale green P+S style cladding will hurt. Hopefully the client is after something nicer for the glass and for a good quality precast. If they do it right, this one will be a stunner!
 
From Yonge St. this weekend:
I don't know what it is about this building, but I really, really wish they'd keep it as is, and put the tower on top of it pretty much.. I just really like the look of it as it stands right now.

475tg.jpg

Photo by me.
 
yyzer said:
partial render and address revised to 88 Scott Street, posted at @BuzzBuzzHome's twitter feed....

2011_09_16_11_13_03_88ScottbyConcert_3.png
Click to expand...

Looks good, although I'd prefer if they used a different colour then light blue. Even a darker blue, like Ice might look good here.
 
Here are the teaser shots:

88ScottTeaserCard640.jpg


88ScottTeaserSky179.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top