I just noticed that this project is not going where we all thought it would go (on the land bordered by Sherbourne, Howard, and Glen road) but that it will be on the crescent shaped parcel further east.

I would like to see it get built as proposed but I can imagine the residents of Rosedale will fight this hard as will the city planners who hate these forms of development , i.e. very tall slab towers placed in a park setting.

This is the boldest proposal that we have seen in a long time.
 
St Jamestown was built by a consortium of private developers that also built 40 Homewood, Crescent Town and others. I believe they built and sold four buildings to MTHA.
 
Peepers said:
I would like to see it get built as proposed but I can imagine the residents of Rosedale will fight this hard as will the city planners who hate these forms of development , i.e. very tall slab towers placed in a park setting.
Click to expand...

You never know, they actually could be ecstatic that there is finally going to be a wall between the rich and the poor..lol
 
Needless to say, I'm ecstatic that aA had the foresight and urban sense to retain and restore those abandoned Victorian houses!!
 
from today...
20101031069-1.jpg


20101031072-1.jpg
 
Peepers said:
I would like to see it get built as proposed but I can imagine the residents of Rosedale will fight this hard as will the city planners who hate these forms of development , i.e. very tall slab towers placed in a park setting.
Click to expand...

Speaking as one who lives very close to this proposal, I think it looks great -- as good as anything I could have reasonably hoped for. I'll be at the public meetings to support it.

The three east buildings look to be far from the dreaded "towers in the park", as epitomized by SJT: the podiums extend pretty much all the way to Bloor and Howard. Actually, I'll bet City planners are all over this.
 
Last edited:
not to bash aA, but this doesn't look like a particularly interesting design - at least, it doesn't offer anything new in comparison to what we've seen before, just more bland glass. Coupled with how shoddy a job Lanterra did on Murano, this looks set to be lacklustre.
 
mig174 said:
not to bash aA, but this doesn't look like a particularly interesting design - at least, it doesn't offer anything new in comparison to what we've seen before, just more bland glass. Coupled with how shoddy a job Lanterra did on Murano, this looks set to be lacklustre.
Click to expand...

I'm not necessarily disagreeing with you, but based on my casual acquaintance with Murano, it looks better than average. Could you be more specific about why you think it's "shoddy"?
 
I'm having a hard time making this out. Are we looking at one 50 storey at Howard and Sherbourne plus three at Howard and Bloor at 56, 46 and 53?
 
Uncle Teddy said:
I'm having a hard time making this out. Are we looking at one 50 storey at Howard and Sherbourne plus three at Howard and Bloor at 56, 46 and 53?
Click to expand...

Yes. One tower in the western block at 50s @ 140m, and the other three towers in the eastern block at 56s @ 159m, 46s @ 133m, 53s @ 151m (west to east).

Rather low heights for their floor counts, but still tall for the neighbourhood.
 
From the PDF of the rezoning application posted by G Dog on SSP

Interesting but I hope they are planning to work on the appearance of this project.

01-11-20108-50-03PM.jpg

SitePlan1.jpg

SitePlan2.jpg

Elevations.jpg

Tower1-1.jpg
 
Last edited:
Well, these planning report document illustrations seldom look good. We really need a good render to get a proper look at the design. From what I can see (and extrapolate) these plans indicate a decent set of buildings. While the three towers on the eastern block look similar to each other on the illustration, their differing cross sections and heights should make for a visually interesting sight.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top