New front page story includes this…


…and other higher quality renderings, as does the database file.

Worked in this building. Kinda surprised they are considering this and wondering who would lease these floors. Probably the worst building I have worked in, the floors are old. There's still ashtrays in the bathroom back when you could smoke indoors and they are carpeted (gross). It's far from Union meaning most commuters had to take the TTC from Union which is an inconvenience compared to the buildings closer in the PATH and the amount of crazy homeless people that hang out in the building makes it feel sketchy. Add to that the perfect suicide style atrium. Many days co-workers would jokingly look over and comment how the building is perfect for someone to jump after a bad day at the office. Was never a fan.
Add to that death-trap staircases, drafty windows and harsh air conditioning.
AOB is a safety and environmental disaster.
Apparently, this renovation will keep it this way.
Preliminary Report on this one is headed to the next meeting of TEYCC.


A quick perusal suggests the City lack enthusiasm for it, as currently configured.

From the report:



Of note, given when the application was initially filed is that it has not yet been deemed complete; some materials remain outstanding.
This project was at the City's Design Review Panel on March 9th, 2023.

Discussion began with Kingsett who noted a couple of things.

They declared they have abandoned any idea in the near term anyway, of pursuing the height-add ons to the office towers that were previously approved. Aside from current office market challenges, this was viewed as potentially causing the existing building to clear out of office tenants during any construction and deemed undesirable.

As part of the discussion, it was also noted that CIBC is a large tenant and they will be vacating their space here to shift to CIBC Square. This will leave 280,000ft2 to backfill.


Moving along, a look at the existing mall circulation next to Yonge and how the proposal would change this:



Interesting context shot w/proposed/approved developments shadowed in:



Panel question about the separation distances, proposed distance here from Office to Residential is 18M; the argument made is that primary time of use is different and should allow for closer distances.

Panel question of Media Tower/(ad space); Kingsett has negotiated blocking the north face of the signage; panel feeling strongly that the Media Tower needs to be removed entirely.

Desire expressed to see loading consolidated between the proposal and the existing servicing of Atrium - proponent said this was considered and is possible, but it involved 'structural gymnastics' and would be budgetarily challenging.