Toronto Aura at College Park | 271.87m | 78s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

Ramako said:
Perhaps the height increase was done to vault Aura over Trump's roof height, thereby allowing them to call it the tallest residential building in Canada.
Click to expand...

Correct me if I'm wrong but doesn't Aura already stand to hold this title seeing as Trump and others are not "only residential" towers?
 
Has anyone actually officially heard 80 stories or is this an assumption?

My posting here is 'uncomfirmed' as I don't actually have hard data and I don't often make speculative posts, but it is my understanding that the variances are related to increasing the height of the mechanical floors and not actually an increase in the number of storeys or the density of the project. Again, I don't have any hard data at this point and my assumption certainly could be wrong, but given what I know about the project any increase in the residential GFA would certainly be a surprise to me (a positive surprise).
 
Mike in TO said:
Has anyone actually officially heard 80 stories or is this an assumption?

My posting here is 'uncomfirmed' as I don't actually have hard data and I don't often make speculative posts, but it is my understanding that the variances are related to increasing the height of the mechanical floors and not actually an increase in the number of storeys or the density of the project. Again, I don't have any hard data at this point and my assumption certainly could be wrong, but given what I know about the project any increase in the residential GFA would certainly be a surprise to me (a positive surprise).
Click to expand...

Wait till tomorrow and the truth will come out..:confused::)

Hearing Date: Wednesday, October 6, 2010
Time: 1:30 p.m.
Location: Committee Room No. 2 - Toronto City Hall - 100 Queen Street West
 
Mike in TO said:
Has anyone actually officially heard 80 stories or is this an assumption?

My posting here is 'uncomfirmed' as I don't actually have hard data and I don't often make speculative posts, but it is my understanding that the variances are related to increasing the height of the mechanical floors and not actually an increase in the number of storeys or the density of the project. Again, I don't have any hard data at this point and my assumption certainly could be wrong, but given what I know about the project any increase in the residential GFA would certainly be a surprise to me (a positive surprise).
Click to expand...

The talk of additional floors was indeed completely and utterly baseless speculation.
 
How exactly can they increase the mechanical componenet without increasing the height of the building? (lowering ceiling heights notwithstanding) The mechanical penthouse is increasing in height from 231 to 243 which is 13 metres. The top of the crown is moving up from 252 to 264 but, overall is maintaining a near identical height when you factor in the mechanical penthouse increase.

P.S. yeah, this building has a crown above the roof of the mechanical penthouse
 
On my journey through City Hall today, I swung by the C of A and checked out the file. To quote the planning rationale provided by Hunter Armstrong & Associates "NO increase in the project's size in terms of gross floor area (max 107,500 square metres) and number of floors (75)."

Also, the reason given for the height increases is "minor adjustments in site-specific height and building envelope (due to mechanical changes and detailed working drawings.)"

Basically, these changes cause a "ripple effect" through the project.

Also on file, a letter from the Councillor in support.
 
My earlier comment, referring to an 80th floor PH, was simply a "theory", as I stated.

Forgive me, but why would the top mechanical floor increase in height by basically 4 extra floors (12 meters!) without actually adding floors?

Canderel is requesting to build an additional 5% in building height (excluding spire/crown) which would be incredibly expensive without some offsetting revenue stream.

As a businessman, I just don't see the logic (unless they add floors to sell).

Am I missing something?
 
Last edited:
Here's a map of Aura's currently approved building height:

Auraheight.png


As you can see, the top main roof slab sits at 231.09m and they wish to increase this by 12m (thus increasing the top parapet by 12m as well).

Once again, I'm left scratching my head as to how Aura's total building height can go from 243m originally, then to 252m in Dec09, and now 264m today, without adding a single floor... :confused:

Tacking on 21 extra meters (to the original plan) is no small potatoes.

Not that I'm complaining, higher the better!
 
Last edited:
Johnzz said:
Here's a map of Aura's currently approved building height:

Auraheight.png


As you can see, the top main roof slab sits at 231.09m and they wish to increase this by 12m (thus increasing the top parapet by 12m as well).

Once again, I'm left scratching my head as to how Aura's total building height can go from 243m originally, then to 252m in Dec09, and now 264m today, without adding a single floor... :confused:

Tacking on 21 extra meters (to the original plan) is no small potatoes.

Not that I'm complaining, higher the better!
Click to expand...


It is a little odd - That's almost 70 feet or the equivalent of a 7 storey building.
 
Not sure, but it could be the floor to floor height that changed. If this changed from 9' to 9'6" that would be 35' for the building. Floor to floor heights are hard to nail down early in the design process.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top