Toronto The One | 328.4m | 91s | Mizrahi Developments | Foster + Partners

evandyk said:
Would be funny if Mizrahi gathered another parcel south of there and left the Rogers building there forever, just to spite them :)

Like the Tom Jones Steakhouse, it could forever be a stub, surrounded by giants.
Click to expand...
Yes it would be funny but I wonder if the city would allow it. The owner(s) would complain that a large development to the south would render their property less valuable and may force a negotiated settlement/buyout.
 
khaldoon said:
Yes it would be funny but I wonder if the city would allow it. The owner(s) would complain that a large development to the south would render their property less valuable and may force a negotiated settlement/buyout.
Click to expand...

True. Plus they would be in a shadow a lot of the time, so probably have a veto.
 
evandyk said:
True. Plus they would be in a shadow a lot of the time, so probably have a veto.
Click to expand...
The City gives property owners the opportunity to take a buyout as part of an assemblage, but if the owners refuse to sell, the City will not hold up the rezoning of an adjacent assembly forever. You don't get to hold others for ransom if you've been given a reasonable chance to be compensated for selling your property but don't want to play. Just look at CityLights up at Broadway and Redpath…

42
 
evandyk said:
Probably thinks it will be worth $20M to whomever is trying to build a parcel south of the One.
Click to expand...

That idea (building south of The One) is not an easy prospect.

1638894031019.png


At the lower levels, total distance between the podium of 'The One' and the U of T owned building at Charles is only ~58M

Even if 'The One' is sufficiently set back at higher levels, you still 'have to' have a 25M separation from the building to the south.

That leaves you a maximum of 33M of frontage; but I don't see an allowance being made for 0M separation to 'The One's podium level'.

That's a bit tight.

Then you have 55M of depth to the condo wall at the rear:

1638895049916.png


From which you again need to deduct 25M separation distance.

That's 30M

All in, there's a viable floor plate there; though setbacks from Yonge, at least will eat into that as well.

But it's workable, but very little spare room, would seem to require owning pretty much everything in that contiguous frontage.

Could be worth the $$$ and hassle.
 
Northern Light said:
That idea (building south of The One) is not an easy prospect.

View attachment 367656

At the lower levels, total distance between the podium of 'The One' and the U of T owned building at Charles is only ~58M

Even if 'The One' is sufficiently set back at higher levels, you still 'have to' have a 25M separation from the building to the south.

That leaves you a maximum of 33M of frontage; but I don't see an allowance being made for 0M separation to 'The One's podium level'.

That's a bit tight.

Then you have 55M of depth to the condo wall at the rear:

View attachment 367658

From which you again need to deduct 25M separation distance.

That's 30M

All in, there's a viable floor plate there; though setbacks from Yonge, at least will eat into that as well.

But it's workable, but very little spare room, would seem to require owning pretty much everything in that contiguous frontage.

Could be worth the $$$ and hassle.
Click to expand...
Maybe a Massey Tower type building with a big retail podium and nice parkette on top?
 
The UofT building is set back quite significantly from its north lot line, by quick math gives you about a 32x38m area to build a tower on the site provided you don't have to meet the 75 degree angular plane from Yonge Street like further south. Can't be bothered to check if it applies here or not.

It's actually an excellent development site if the whole row of buildings can actually be assembled.
 
innsertnamehere said:
The UofT building is set back quite significantly from its north lot line, by quick math gives you about a 32x38m area to build a tower on the site provided you don't have to meet the 75 degree angular plane from Yonge Street like further south. Can't be bothered to check if it applies here or not.

It's actually an excellent development site if the whole row of buildings can actually be assembled.
Click to expand...

I measured from the U of T tower building, not the lot line.
 
evandyk said:
The city should zone it as parkland then buy it cheap. That'll show the guy who refused to sell!
Click to expand...
If only that were legal ;)

There have been pretty extensive expropriation hearings over municipalities trying to pull games like this - put simply, it's not allowed :)
 
The elevator core seems remarkably thin, I’m surprised they didn’t make it a bit thicker to better support the weight. And save a bit on the costs of the supercolumns.
 
MichaelZ said:
The elevator core seems remarkably thin, I’m surprised they didn’t make it a bit thicker to better support the weight. And save a bit on the costs of the supercolumns.
Click to expand...
Then the elevator core would have cost more and have been more costly to transfer its loads to the supercolumns below where it ends.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top