UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
...but that's speculating a bit as the receivership had indicated before that all arrangements would be honoured. Nor does this rule out that the article misquoted the storage count from a previous agreement...that is, it was 85 for a long time before they got their height increase. And they got that height increase before receivership butter hit the fan.Though the height increase is tied to additional benefits the city secured. If the receivership doesn’t want to commit to that deal, there’s no height increase. This could be the impasse.
To be clear, I am not dismissing this could be the case here...rather, I have my factual doubts on the storage count claimed for this article. People misspeak things...even in writing.
Edit/Erratum: Due my lack of confidence in what what I've posted on the occasion, I edit/delete my post out. However, due to said respective post being quoted, I am now restoring it for the context of the conversation: My apologies for any confusion and inconvenience this may have caused. Silly me... >.<
-----
Tl,dr: Seems like Sam was getting in the way and therefore, was sent a packing...
...didn't help he was trying to sue the receivership hand that was helping him from what I gather from that TorStar article. That's kinda embarrassing really. /sigh
I'm pretty sure that was a misquote on the writer's part.It's interesting how in the article it still has the one being placed at 85 stories. Wondering if possibly the receiver is only going to go to this height instead of the 91 that was approved
Last edited: