Mirvish+Gehry Toronto | 308m | 82s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners

greenleaf

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
2,534
Reaction score
1,116
Location
Downtown
Here we go! Prelim report here: http://app.toronto.ca/tmmis/viewAgendaItemHistory.do?item=2013.TE22.41

This application proposes to redevelop two separate parcels, municipally known as 266-270 King Street West (east parcel) and 274-322 King Street West (west parcel) for the purpose of a mixed use development on each.

The East Parcel would be developed with an 82-storey mixed use building complete with a six storey base. The West Parcel would be developed with two tower elements having total heights of 84 and 86 storeys from John Street to Ed Mirvish Way respectively, including a six-storey base.

A total of approximately 22,220 m2 of non-residential gross floor area, 2,709 dwelling units and 311 parking spaces are proposed.

The development as proposed would result in the complete demolition of four (4) properties designated under Part IV of the Ontario Heritage Act.

This report provides preliminary information on the above-noted application and seeks Community Council's directions on further processing of the applications and on the community consultation process.

Staff are recommending that this application continue to be processed, but that a final report not be submitted for Community Council consideration, until two separate studies that are currently underway, namely the King-Spadina East Precinct Built Form Review (Built Form Review) and Heritage Conservation District study, can better inform this applications' review. Staff are targeting a final report for the application early in 2014.
 

fedplanner

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
572
Reaction score
18
Location
NYC
What stands out to me is that city staff didn't reject this one outright. They are willing to entertain 80-storeys at this location. I believe Adam Vaughan's fingerprints are on this report, helping to guide it through the approvals process. (Guess who's fingerprints are on Massey Tower's rejection report.)
 

Ramako

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Oct 30, 2007
Messages
4,627
Reaction score
720
Location
Toronto, ON
What stands out to me is that city staff didn't reject this one outright. They are willing to entertain 80-storeys at this location. I believe Adam Vaughan's fingerprints are on this report, helping to guide it through the approvals process. (Guess who's fingerprints are on Massey Tower's rejection report.)

Are you just speculating that Vaughan influenced the decision on Massey Tower or is there something in the report that would indicate as much?
 

greenleaf

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 16, 2007
Messages
2,534
Reaction score
1,116
Location
Downtown
What stands out to me is that city staff didn't reject this one outright. They are willing to entertain 80-storeys at this location. I believe Adam Vaughan's fingerprints are on this report, helping to guide it through the approvals process. (Guess who's fingerprints are on Massey Tower's rejection report.)

I can't recall ever seeing an outright refusal on a prelim report, so I don't think it's too much of a surprise. You seem to be stirring the pot for no reason.
 

fedplanner

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
572
Reaction score
18
Location
NYC
Outright refusal of a preliminary report is rare but it does happen. City councilors also have huge amount of influence over the development that occurs in their ward. I stand by my statements. You guys can believe whatever you want.
 

AlvinofDiaspar

Moderator
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 22, 2007
Messages
29,232
Reaction score
18,955
Location
Toronto
Of course they do, accepting that reality doesn't make outright rejections at the preliminary level common, whether they are 60s or 80s (or whether it is in AV, KMT or PM's ward).

AoD
 

fedplanner

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jan 11, 2012
Messages
572
Reaction score
18
Location
NYC
Of course they do, accepting that reality doesn't make outright rejections at the preliminary level common, whether they are 60s or 80s (or whether it is in AV, KMT or PM's ward).

AoD

I accept that. I am reminded of an interview with Brad Lamb on Urban Toronto about a tower on King Street at about 50-storeys. IIRC, the planning department was threatening to write the a refusal report upon learning of the application because it significantly exceeded the heights and density envisioned for the area. Brad Lamb goes on to directly cite Adam Vaughan as being supportive of the development and speaking with city staff. I strongly believe something similar is occurring here with Mirvish+Gehry.

On my other point, City Hall is a highly political environment and the Planning Department is not immune. It's just the nature of the beast.
 

000

Senior UT Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 13, 2008
Messages
395
Reaction score
51
Yea but it's nothing important. "(Toronto—February 14, 2013) OCAD University announced today that it will name its new 25,000-square-foot facility at the proposed Mirvish+Gehry Toronto project The Princess of Wales Centre for Visual Arts at OCAD University." and some other details about which programs will be housed there http://montanasteelepreview.com/eblasts/mirv-ocadu/ocadu-toronto-press-release.pdf
 

Mongo

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Apr 23, 2007
Messages
2,312
Reaction score
170
Height of the 86s tower confirmed at 284m, boo.

According to the preliminary report, the height of the 86-story building is 289.8m (950.8ft) to the top of the mechanical penthouse, the height of the 84-story building is 286.0m (938.3ft) to the top of the mechanical penthouse, and the height of the 82-story building is 278.6m (914.0ft) to the top of the mechanical penthouse.
 

travis3000

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jul 9, 2012
Messages
655
Reaction score
385
Those heights are sooo close to being a supertall! If they could add another 50+ feet to the 86 storey tower then that would be amazing. Here's hoping.
 

someMidTowner

¯\_(ツ)_/¯
Staff member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 2, 2011
Messages
9,145
Reaction score
13,652
Location
(Former) Ward 16
Developers, condo buyers, office leasers etc., rarely care about an arbitrary figure such as 1000 feet. The design is what matters. I am surprised that the fact 3 of the tallest buildings in the city are being proposed in one go isn't enough to satisfy the height fans. Plus the proposal calls for 2 art galleries, university space and retail. We are entirely too lucky to be wishing for even one extra foot let alone 50
 

Top