The fact that Great Gulf is involved should make everyone feel comfortable. This is a very reputable builder that has built tall buildings before successfully. They also have deep pockets and solid investors on board. The best thing that ever happened to this project was being bought by Great Gulf (assuming you want it to be a reality and not some fancy vision).
 
ushahid said:
what struggle did they have with one Bloor?
Click to expand...
Lobby issues, massive delays in finishing the common spaces, delays in finishing the outer skin, and the standard occupancy delays and elevator issues (not as common with GG). Not sure if I missed anything?
 
TheSix said:
Lobby issues, massive delays in finishing the common spaces, delays in finishing the outer skin, and the standard occupancy delays and elevator issues (not as common with GG). Not sure if I missed anything?
Click to expand...
I wonder how much of that was due to HP? Very unlikely but I feel that building for a Gehry project with the Mirvish name is on a whoooooole new level.
 
ericmacm said:
The sacrifices that they made for the floor plate size and residential density ... it's entirely possible it could go through with little to no height reductions.
Click to expand...
Call me a pessimist, but I have zero faith that City will let this go through without putting up a Battle-of-Alamo-esque last stand.
 
city needs to consider that they have reduced 237 units from the project and reduced the overall gross floor area and give GG what they need.
 
People seem to have conveniently forgotten that the towers in the original three tower proposal was actually shorter that what was approved - there wasn't much of a "fear" of heights.

AoD
 
I was under the impression that the taller tower was maxed height-wise where it was to avoid a shadowing issue, or to keep it under an angular plane from Queen Street's HCD, or something similar.

42
 
interchange42 said:
I was under the impression that the taller tower was maxed height-wise where it was to avoid a shadowing issue, or to keep it under an angular plane from Queen Street's HCD, or something similar.

42
Click to expand...

Yes - from the Final Staff report:

The building on the east side of Ed Mirvish Way would be limited to a maximum height of 275 metres (82 storeys), inclusive of mechanical penthouse, while to building west of Ed Mirvish Way would be limited to 305 metres (92 storeys), inclusive of mechanical penthouse. The building heights would not result in shadows being cast onto the north sidewalk of Queen Street West in the spring and fall equinoxes, after 11:18 a.m.
Click to expand...
(p. 11 of PDF)

AoD
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
building heights would not result in shadows being cast onto the north sidewalk of Queen Street West in the spring and fall equinoxes
Click to expand...

Because we all know that concrete sidewalks of Queen St. W are in full bloom during the equinoxes. Being an endangered species, the Queen St. W sidewalk shall not lose a minute of daylight during its blooming phase, lest we create an environmental catastrophe!
Is it just me, or does anyone else find this excuse for slashing building heights by the City laughable and moronic?
 
Happy Friday, you can stop refreshing. Docs are finally in:

Screen Shot 2019-01-11 at 3.39.55 PM.png


Screen Shot 2019-01-11 at 3.36.47 PM.png


The total quantum of space devoted to residential and non-residential uses across the subject site in both the West and East Blocks is considerably similar to that approved in the site-specific by-law, however the redistribution of some of these uses requires amendment to the in-force zoning. The revised development scheme proposes a decrease in total GFA to 171,718 square metres, comprised of 130,914 square metres of residential GFA and 40,804 square metres of non-residential GFA, with a resultant FSI of 17.9 times the lot area.
• The proposal includes 1,716 residential units (a reduction of 237 units from what is currently approved), with a mix of unit types including 29% two-bedroom and 14% three-bedroom units, as well as indoor and outdoor amenity space totalling approximately 4,734 square metres.
• The number of car parking spaces and bicycle parking spaces provided on the subject site have been reduced.
Click to expand...

The introduction of the high-end hotel use in the West Tower results in an increase in the nonresidential GFA and reduction of the number of proposed residential units (i.e. 1,716 proposed from 1,953 approved in the site-specific by-law) and of the total proposed gross floor area on the subject site (i.e. 171,718 square metres from 174,000 square metres approved in the sitespecific by-law).
Click to expand...
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top