[LUVIT!]

Based upon the recent recalling that has happened in our fair city I agree with the above statement. In addition I now realize that some of the 70's vibe is AOK.
" I love the night life I love to boogie! "

 

[condovo]

I wish we had news on the tower too, but we do not. I'd like to see a recladding, personally, and maybe more, but as recladdings are not required to be seen by Urban Design and only go to the Building Department for inspection to make sure they meet code, well, the aesthetic nightmare that is the 401 Bay recladding is a cautionary tale that mitigates my urges for something new here somewhat. This tower could be much better, but we have no assurances that it would be.

42

Any chance of that "loophole" being closed to require re-claddings to be reviewed by the DRP too? Is this issue on anyone's radar outside of UT?

 

[interchange42]

Any chance of that "loophole" being closed to require re-claddings to be reviewed by the DRP too? Is this issue on anyone's radar outside of UT?

Urban Design became VERY aware of it just before 401 Bay started to transform just across the street from them — they actually learned about it from us, well me — when I called to ask why it was being allowed to happen. (This was at the rendering stage, and since the recladding didn't require their permission, it was news to them. This was right after the successful recladding of First Canadian Place which they had been consulted on, having been volunteered to them for scrutiny.) Anyway, it's up to them to get internal processes changed, and I assume that kind of thing is not simple… …but one can always call their City Councillor and politely point out that the city just got architecturally buggered and it could happen again, and things need to change regarding major recladding plans.

42

(Edited for clarity above.)

 

[Koops65]

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Urban Design became VERY aware of it just before 401 Bay started to transform just across the street from them — they actually learned about it from us, well me — when I called to ask why it was being allowed to happen. (This was at the rendering stage, and since the recladding didn't require their permission, it was news to them. This was right after the successful recladding of First Canadian Place which they had been consulted on, having been volunteered to them for scrutiny.) Anyway, it's up to them to get internal processes changed, and I assume that kind of thing is not simple… …but one can always call their City Councillor and politely point out that the city just got architecturally buggered and it could happen again, and things need to change regarding major recladding plans.

42

In a just society, The City would force them to remove the current offending cladding and restore it to what it was.

 

[AlbertC]

Cumberland Terrace - KingSett Capital

www.kingsettcapital.com

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

...that looks a tad better.

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

Updated drawings for the smaller two towers uploaded to the city site yesterday.

 

[3Dementia]

Wonder if anything like this early rendering is still in the plans from Janet Rosenberg + Studio. I think it was intended to echo the Muskoka rock and Mist Gardens she also designed for Yorkville Park. Couldn’t find any mention of Cumberland Square on her site.

Link

 

[ChesterCopperpot]

JRS are still listed on the latest landscape plans

 

[Northern Light]

@ChesterCopperpot on a roll with renders today!

 

[Art Tsai]

New renderings are updated in the database. The storey count changed from 75, 61 & 50 storeys to 75, 64 & 50 storeys. Building height changed from 253.89m, 237.43m & 210.30m to 253.92m, 210.75m, and 169.15m. The total number of units proposed is 925 units proposed for Tower A & B; however, there is no information posted in regards to Tower C unit count proposed. Finally, the total parking count was reduced from 256 parking to 247 parking.

Renderings are taken from the architectural plan via Site Plan Approval.

 

[condovo]

The floor counts increased or stayed the same on 2 of the towers but their heights decreased significantly. Are they proposing 8-1/2 ft ceilings now instead of 9? I assume that's not the case in high-end buildings like these so what gives?

 

[interchange42]

The floor counts increased or stayed the same on 2 of the towers but their heights decreased significantly. Are they proposing 8-1/2 ft ceilings now instead of 9? I assume that's not the case in high-end buildings like these so what gives?

To answer that question immediately (only 6 weeks later!!), is yes, the floors have been shaved. Most floors in the buildings (upwards from the 26th storey) will be 9' 8.16" floor to floor. If we assume one foot for the slab, underlay, and ceiling, that's 8' 8.16" for those floors, so a little more than 8 1/2' each…

…while there are some floors between the 15th and 25th levels that are 9' 2.25" from floor to floor. Again, if we assume one foot for the slab, underlay, and ceiling, that's 8' 2.25" for those floors.

In the end, the developer needs a pro forma that works,

Meanwhile, the latest submission for SPA covers the tallest tower at the site, which will have 725 suites across its 75 floors. Database updated to reflect that.

42

 

[ProjectEnd]

At the end of the day, KingSett is vending this. So they'll try and pack as many floors in as possible and let the buyer figure out what they want to construct. It's more-appealing to the vendor to have the higher count as it makes the product more enticing, even if you know it's not feasible from a construction perspective (transfer slabs and other structure, M&E, etc. will eventually cut this down).