TossYourJacket said:
A sizable part of this forum seems to think buildings might as well not be built unless they're supertalls. I feel like every project in the upper 200ms is endlessly beset by whining that "if only it was over 300m", as if height is the only value in architectural design.

Also worth noting, probably way less than 5% of the people who end up living in this building will care at all if it's a supertall or not.
Click to expand...
I mean when it's 298m that just feels like teasing us. Anything under 290m I couldn't care less, that's just the height, and in fact sometimes even then it's too tall.
 
UtakataNoAnnex said:
I mean if it where 300 metre plus of aluminum backed grey spandrel, I suspect a sizable part of the forum would want to burn it with fire. So I agree, there's also a "careful what you wish for" component about this debate.
Click to expand...
I mean we're possibly gonna get 298m of that with Concord Sky, so that's probably close enough to make the point. Unless Cressford somehow ordered the materials for that tower really early before they went broke.
 
TossYourJacket said:
I mean we're possibly gonna get 298m of that with Concord Sky, so that's probably close enough to make the point. Unless Cressford somehow ordered the materials for that tower really early before they went broke.
Click to expand...
Nope...I'm afraid Concord has appeared to have ordered a complete redesign of both cladding and balconies for that. Just think of the horror... >.<
 
A closer look at 645 Yonge in context with development in the area:

52453200011_1fdfb68ae5_k.jpg


52453647210_eb8136e3b3_k.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 645Yonge-1.jpg
    645Yonge-1.jpg
    210.8 KB · Views: 109
Last edited:
639-653 Yonge Street
February 1, 2023
6:30 PM – Virtual Hearing
Virtual meeting to discuss official plan amendment, zoning by-law amendment, and site plan review to permit the redevelopment of the Property with a 76-storey mixed use mixed-use building comprised of new high-quality retail space on the ground floor and community cultural and residential space above. The Proposal contains a total of 678 dwelling units and a total gross floor area of 55,110 square metres, including approximately 53,988 square metres of residential space, approximately 697 square metres of retail/commercial space, and approximately 425 square metres of community cultural space, resulting in an overall density of 33.0 FSI.
 
The Star out with an article on this development that they just discovered, LOL....

The article is lamenting the loss of theatre space.

https://www.thestar.com/entertainme...-arts-community-says-loss-is-significant.html (paywalled at time of posting)

Key bits from the above:

1677605139180.png


Interesting transaction history: Mirvish actually owned the theatre (purchased it) in 2008 for a mere 9M; they sold it back in 2015 for 15M.

1677605412377.png
 
This site and even blogTO covered this months ago!!!

From The Star article:
"While there are scores of smaller, black-box venues across Toronto, and a handful of larger houses like the Princess of Wales and Elgin Theatres, there’s a missing middle of performances spaces in the city with a capacity between 500 and 800 seats."
Let's hope TOLive is reading this. Sounds like a good opportunity for the St. Lawrence Centre plans....
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top