I think it's really just key that the immediate area remains with a good consistency for office space, it just provides a more vibrant, successful neighbourhood that can help businesses of any size or function. I'm happy the city councillors saw that the lack of remediated office space was a great issue, and that the height was unfit for the area.
 
And staff's refusal recommendation has become Council's decision: they will send representation to the OMB to oppose this development.

42
 
GenerationLee said:
I think it's really just key that the immediate area remains with a good consistency for office space, it just provides a more vibrant, successful neighbourhood that can help businesses of any size or function. I'm happy the city councillors saw that the lack of remediated office space was a great issue, and that the height was unfit for the area.
Click to expand...

We can't keep funneling office jobs into the core. At some point, the east/west, north/south subway connections and maybe even some sort of GO access will spur more demand for office space here.
 
maestro said:
We can't keep funneling office jobs into the core. At some point, the east/west, north/south subway connections and maybe even some sort of GO access will spur more demand for office space here.
Click to expand...
What??? How did I say I wanted more office employment in Downtown? I was more so saying I'd like to see a good basis of office jobs in the Yonge-Eglinton area than anything.
 
They have reached a settlement on this one - the decision is posted on the OMB website.

Now 50 storeys, 177.9 metres. now with over 6000sm of office space, essentially matching the existing office building in size.

10m setback from the east, 0 metre setback from the west with a limiting distance agreement for next door.
 
innsertnamehere said:
They have reached a settlement on this one - the decision is posted on the OMB website.

Now 50 storeys, 177.9 metres. now with over 6000sm of office space, essentially matching the existing office building in size.
10m setback from the east, 0 metre setback from the west with a limiting distance agreement for next door.
Click to expand...

Who cares about the height when so much is going on in that area, the nice thing is that they are replacing the office component:cool:
 
The refusal report does note the lack of office space in the initial proposal, but the main issue was that the site was too small for the height proposed. Interesting that the City is now ok with 3 more stories. Have there been any changes to the setbacks from Eglinton?
 
6.1m from eglinton for the tower - I think what made this work is the limiting distance agreement with the property to the west. The initial proposal did not have that. That agreement essentially kills potential for a tower to the west of this one on the block.
 
Excellent news. A little bit of extra height is small compensation for keeping office space here.

innsertnamehere said:
6.1m from eglinton for the tower - I think what made this work is the limiting distance agreement with the property to the west. The initial proposal did not have that. That agreement essentially kills potential for a tower to the west of this one on the block.
Click to expand...

West of 55 is too small of a site. The building to the east, 75 Eglinton Ave E, is more suitable for development.
 
It was always a 2 tower block - they just needed to figure out how to make it work given the scattered ownership structure.
 
The database file has been updated with the number of approved floors and the maximum allowed height of 177.9 metres.

42

@DonValleyRainbow
 
I worked in the current building between 1989 and about 1992, and it had aged really badly even then. If there is one building in the area that should be replaced, it's that one.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top