• Thread starter Suicidal Gingerbread Man
  • Start date
innsertnamehere said:
no need to get personal.look at Earlier in the boom, we had two supertall proposals that came along, and just kept on moving, albeit with one cancelled and the other one with a height reduction.this could be well over 320m if you use 80 floors of 25,000 square feet... (4m ceiling hieghItts) but it could also be as little as 160m using the same stats, but with 40 floors. (thats 1 million square feet)
Click to expand...

It's not personal at all. The point was frivolous and almost wholly irrelevant. It also descended into the worst form of pining for a supertall.
 
Last edited:
Ramako said:
I don't understand. You spent the first half of your post lambasting me for pointing out the obvious, that economic troubles are often correlated to, rather than caused by, skyscraper construction, but then you seem to imply (in the part I bolded) that building supertalls (i.e. overbuilding) would, in and of itself, cause an economic downtown (i.e. 30% of people becoming unemployed). Which is it?
Click to expand...

I'm glad you predicate your false dichotomy upon the words "seem to imply", since it implicitly acknowledges that what follows is likely torqed.

The point remains: if "squeezing out a supertall" entails you and 30% of your friends being jobless for three years, would you still want it?

Talking about economics tends to be terribly impersonal and abstract, and many people invariably presume that those bearing the brunt of any belt-tightening will be someone else.

So let's personalize it.

And let's see if that Pollyanna-ized supertall fanboyism still remains.
 
Last edited:
Northern Magus said:
The point remains: if "squeezing out a supertall" entails you and 30% of your friends being jobless for three years, would you still want it?
Click to expand...

No, I absolutely wouldn't, but I disagree with the fundamental premise of your question, being the notion that "squeezing out a supertall" (i.e. the construction of a supertall at the end of a building cycle) entails that me and 30% of my friends will lose our jobs.
 
Well if everyone here at UT focuses aggressively on creating their own global multi-national corporate juggernauts we could have a forest of commercial buildings in 25 years.
 
11x said:
http://www.montrealgazette.com/busi...lopment+prime+Toronto+site/7359059/story.html
Click to expand...

What piques my interest in that article is - what has put this project on the front burner? This is a prized site and I gather from the article, Ivanhoe Cambridge wants to make a statement here and would likely have to produce a pretty major project to do so. My guess is they must have an interested potential major tennant that they don’t want to lose to another site and would like to impress – forcing them to start looking at various scenarios to make as big a splash as they can – and soon. This could be very exciting.
 
Big Daddy said:
What piques my interest in that article is - what has put this project on the front burner? This is a prized site and I gather from the article, Ivanhoe Cambridge wants to make a statement here and would likely have to produce a pretty major project to do so. My guess is they must have an interested potential major tennant that they don’t want to lose to another site and would like to impress – forcing them to start looking at various scenarios to make as big a splash as they can – and soon. This could be very exciting.
Click to expand...

From my understanding, they want a presence in TO. They have cash, and a large/prime piece of land. Hopefully, they hit the mark with this one.
 
If they're shopping around for tenants; I'm surprised there isn't some sort of rendering floating around.
 
probably just shopping around as in they saying that they have up to 2 million square feet built to the needs of the tenant..
 
At one time there was speculation that this site would house the new Bay Bus Terminal (plus more buses) and if that's still on the cards then the developers have already got a major tenant in their sights.
 
DSC said:
At one time there was speculation that this site would house the new Bay Bus Terminal (plus more buses) and if that's still on the cards then the developers have already got a major tenant in their sights.
Click to expand...

Yeah, i think thats always been the plan for 45 Bay.............A Metrolinx spokesperson confirmed to the Star this week that the agency is “contemplating” building a new bus terminal at 45 Bay St., currently a parking lot just east of the Air Canada Centre.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/article/1112225--landmark-bus-depot-loses-its-lustre
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top