The OMB doesn't "get involved." An interested party has to apply to the OMB. You presume "politics," but don't state what you think that politics is. Prior to visiting an appeals body like the OMB, a decision has to be rendered, as in, for example, the Committee of Adjustments. Of course...

Nowhere else in North America is there a body with the extensive range and power of the OMB. You fail to acknowledge that. You also fail to acknowledge that there are very critical elements of planning that the OMB does not involve itself in. The tendency is to focus on envelope and virtually...

Yes.

If you really care about city building, then why would you support the interference of the OMB in that effort?

I am curious about your conclusion. How did you arrive at it? Why would the city not be for the better if the city had control over its planning and operated it's own dispute settlement body?

Thanks for clearing that up.

Condo blue-balls only occurs when the building is going up. It's more a duration issue. You shouldn't be suffering condo blue-balls if the market is soft, or the if prospects aren't being stimulated or excited.

Funny thing: virtually all the renderings floating around still show the originally proposed 14 floor version of Fashion House. The building was subsequently reduced to twelve. Some time ago, I saw an image of the 12 floor version (what is being built), and it didn't include the red blinds...

Regarding the debate about whether the building is finished or not, it is an all-too-typical situation in Toronto: the building is complete - but not completely. Label is appropriately, and one could argue that it as a new class or paradox.

I can only hope your optimism is on the mark.

The height of the building is inevitably based on economic sensibility. As much as people want monuments, such a project is dictated by commercial viability.

That's the approved height (in terms of floor count).

At first glance, I would agree. Then again, the images might be quite preliminary.

Unfortunately you appear to believe your words are so important that they demand immediate response. They are not. Get over yourself. And as you didn't answer the question, you have no idea how this building will turn out. Unfortunately you can't admit this. But I'll give you another chance...

No Automation Gallery, it isn't according to gristle, it's according to your incapacity to read other people's posts, and your shallow efforts to misquote them. With the exception of these three proposed structures, the others lie outside of the King-Spadina planning area (to which I was making...

And you know how it turns out at the end already? Right.

Perfect response.

Once again, you are relying on your misreading of my statements. I have not defended any one developer. That is an assumption you are making - and wasting a lot of time by repeating it. You seem to know my stance on the casino proposal, then you should know my opinion of the rest of the project...

That's no longer quite so. The new planning guidelines for the east precinct of King-Spadina reflect the reality of towers in the area.

The casino is mentioned because a sizable portion of the retail facilities and hotel for the Oxford proposal are related directly or indirectly to the casino, that's why the casino is mentioned. There is no casino related to Riocan/Allied proposal. Now is that clearer? In addition, the...