So we went from no balconies, to balconies, back no balconies and lost 20m of height in the process?

Sad for the height chop but glad the newest version appears to be closer in design to the original proposal again.
 
This one received a 20 metre, 6 storey haircut in a ZBA resubmission from March. The tower design has also been changed a bit again.

View attachment 392976
View attachment 392977

Some statistics from the planning justification:

View attachment 392978
View attachment 392979

@Northern Light may be interested in looking over the landscape plans, given that they're now proposing to retain the two existing trees on Adelaide:

View attachment 392980

All images taken from documents in the AIC.

First observation, a drop of 48 units; and increase of 7 resident parking spaces. That seems peculiar...........

***

On the subject of the trees.........

I see why they wanted to retain this one, surprisingly robust specimen for the terrible planting conditions.

1650034991569.png


Likewise w/this one:

1650035062952.png


I have my deep suspicions that they won't survive construction here, but it's worth a try.

But a quick glance suggests a couple of things to me.

1) The trees both come to the edge of, if not encroach into the current building envelope room. That suggests a pretty material pruning is likely.

2) Neither of those trees are likely supporting themselves solely w/roots contained within those tiny concrete boxes. If they are, that's a near miracle, but it also means they are likely girdled (running in circles, choking each other).
I find it more likely, especially when you look at the soil appearing to come out of the bottom of the planter, that these feisty trees have put roots under the sidewalk and are relying on its poor condition/age in terms of water getting underneath.
This leads to an obvious problem, if true, that the sidewalks here are due to be reconstructed, and presumably won't be permeable when done, but it's also likely that tree roots would be damaged during reconstruction.

But, I hope I'm wrong.
 
Last edited:
crazy the city would approve this building given the poor 21 nelson in the north would feel like living in the basement of all the surroudning tall buildings
Oh, we put up a big fuss and this led to more re-designs. I am NOT looking forward to construction for 4 years a mere 10 meters from my building. I might move, especially with Mirvish for at least 8 years.

The city again argues that this area is designated high-density... I wish I had known that before.
 
This is basically right next to the core core of the city and is right by two subway stations, two streetcar lines (King with special street priority), and soon even more transit with the Ontario Line. I'm not sure why there would be expectation that this area wouldn't be high density eventually. It's kind of odd that it has escaped that and stayed relatively undeveloped for so long.
 
Notice that the architects for this project is AS + GG and will be incorporating a zipper type feature similar to their 160 Front Street West project. Hope it turns out as well as that project has so far.
 
For comparison, here is a rendering in the database:

121F9DD9-21E9-43B6-9629-DB771609EC0D.jpeg

Here is a 160 Front Street West photo recently posted by Johnny Au:


F6DFA899-3313-4864-935C-C57DCD319C48.jpeg
 
what do you guys think? Freed"s last few projects have turned out lousy. do you guys think that hiring a famous architect firm will motivate Freed to do well on this tower?
 
How's this coming along? I live in 21 Nelson (facing north) and am a bit worried because of the eventual noise.

Council approved.

No evidence I can see of any appeals filed.

No permits applied for, or issued.

So nothing happening in the near term.
 

Back
Top