J
Janbe
Guest
This is just like M5V Life, the city had similar disagreements and the developer pointed to Festival Centre and the many other 40 plus tower proposals for the area.
Toronto Picasso Condos | 128.62m | 39s | Mattamy Homes | Teeple Architects
- Thread starter maestro
- Start date
grey
Senior Member
^^^ A lot of people are pretty bitter about the M5V ruling, and for good reason. TAS is just lucky that they've got such a sexy design.
J
Janbe
Guest
Look at all the 40 Plus towers that are proposed for this area. All because of Festival Centre. This area is changing.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Adam Vaughan is anti-club anti-hirise,he would be just as happy with empty lots in this area strech.
Making this man even happier is replacing these empty lots with a couple of extra hostels and homeless shelters.
Last edited:
H
Hydrogen
Guest
This sounds like the typical whining of a tower foamer who could not really give a shit about anything but height.
One reason why taller buildings are allowed on that portion of King is that it is a main street with a considerable stock of storefronts and a main transit line. Richmond doesn't really have that within the same vicinity. Yet there is a debate how high things should be allowed to go. Even now, there is an increasing pressure on the portion of King, west of Spadina, for ever taller buildings. If these go up, this will eventually bring pressure to redevelop the existing and unique warehouse buildings in that area.
Talk to Vaughan. You'd learn what he actually thinks.
J
Janbe
Guest
I am confident this project is a go. If the city didn't approve Festival Centre then things could be different.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
This is downtown where land values are at a premium,not to many developers are going to be spending big bucks to build 7-10 storey lofts.Like or not Toronto with its latest boom has been Manhattanized.
grey
Senior Member
Wait, I didn't quite get that... Are you saying you don't think this building will be built? What about the Festival tower? It changed everything. Because it's 40 storeys. Everything is different now. Just look at M5V.
Last edited:
J
Janbe
Guest
What I am saying is that people think the developer is not going to build this project because the city turned the proposal down.
Just like the city turned down MSV Life.
Just like the city turned down MSV Life.
grey
Senior Member
Funny you chose to reference Manhattan, because I would consider the proliferation of mid-rise warehouse character in this neighbourhood to be the epitome of Manhattanization in this city.
grey
Senior Member
I don't get it. Are saying M5V Life was turned down because Festival Tower is 40 storeys? But I think this building will be built because of Festival Tower. It changed this neighbourhood.
Last edited:
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Whats all the fuss,35-40 storey buildings are not considered tall in todays world.
marcus_a_j
Senior Member
I am confident you have nothing else to say. You keep going on about Festival Centre this, Festival Centre that. Well remember, Festival Tower has a very significant cultural component to it, the Bell Lightbox, which serves a far greater purpose than another condotel building (albeit with a really nice hotel planned). It's also directly on a main street/streetcar route and has a lower FSI (read: less density). The site in question is also a lot closer to Queen Street West, a historic district, than King Street and Festival Tower. Approving this would set a greater precedent for greater heights along Queen West that I doubt the City would want.
I'm sure that if this was the same application but another clunker that Tridel used to put up then there would be less whining. Although I've gone on here and said I don't like the design and I think it looks more like a half played game of Jenga, I like that the design is different and intriguing. It's too bad that it was proposed for the Ent. District and not one of the CityPlace blocks (which would be a great place for this type of building along the Gardiner and a gateway into the City). The City doesn't approve buildings based on how good or bad the architecture is. This will most likely go to the Board, and I wouldn't be surprised if it does get approved as is or in a slightly modified form.
On another note, I wonder how many people who post on UT about Adam Vaughan have actually talked to him. As Hydrogen said, if you actually have a conversation with him you will learn a lot, and watching him on CityTV or whatever does not count. 300 Front West is taller than this and it was approved during his time on Council. And I'm sure he would rather have the 310 Richmond building approved than empty lots, homeless shelters and hostels (seriously?) since the former would generate a lot more money for the City in assessments than then latter three combined.
grey
Senior Member
Perhaps thirty-five 40-storey buildings would be appropriate, or forty 35-storey buildings, but we're talking about maybe five 35-40 storey point towers surrounded by a context 3-10 storey buildings. There is plenty of room for 35-40 storey buildings. I'm ALL for tall buildings, but why build them here, in a neighbourhood with unique character?
Last edited:
grey
Senior Member
I think Festival Centre (sp) has changed the area. Now M5V Life is getting built, and so will this tower. Because Festival Centre (sp) is 40 storeys and it was approved. I am confident that it will get built.
Festival Centre
M5V Life
help