Slap it down to 50 floors and I'm fully onboard. I love what's going on at street-level. That's what's selling it for me. (I live close by so I'm a "stakeholder.")
 
condovo said:
Slap it down to 50 floors and I'm fully onboard. I love what's going on at street-level. That's what's selling it for me. (I live close by so I'm a "stakeholder.")
Click to expand...

I assume you're joking and you meant city planning has to slap it down some 'cause that's in the job description (and some of them get their jollies doing that). 🙃

Otherwise, what's the difference @ 59 storeys ... besides 100 or so more tax-paying neighbours and 7 dogs?
 

Toronto Model 08-17-22 100 Lombard.png
 
This seems like a perfectly fine place for another cluster of height peak/cluster and it standing out from the buildings around it makes for a more dynamic non-tabletop skyline. I don't really see any practical difference with it being the height it is vs 50 floors. What would meaningfully change if it was shorter? Would likely just contribute to cheapening due to less sales.
 
concrete_and_light said:
What would meaningfully change if it was shorter? Would likely just contribute to cheapening due to less sales.
Click to expand...

The answer (which may be nothing, or a lot) will be found in the Shadow study, which we await.

Numbers aren't magical, but impacts may be tangible.
 
Hope they can execute this. The cantilevers juxtaposed against the massive floor to ceiling windows and the "scooped" floorplate edges should look incredible, especially if tastefully lighted. For all the terrible podium treatments we've seen, this would make up for at least some of them.
 
Last edited:
ProjectEnd said:
Big version of the first image:

View attachment 420740

All three big versions can be downloaded here:

Click to expand...

The "Manhattanization" of Toronto continues. As long as key historic buildings are preserved, as well as heritage facades from all (or most) buildings past a certain age. Of course we would not need this many towers if density was increased moderately across the city. (An average density increase of 2x through way of laneway houses, garden suites, basement apartments, as well as targeted higher density like midrises; you could have 5.5 million people within the City of Toronto without more towers.) However, this is the current best way to build lots of housing, and I am a sucker for big buildings.
 
Pleasantly surprised by the bold height and look here, it's all down to the execution on this one. Seems as if the clock is ticking for most of Jarvis.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top