Silly question time: I presume this building will continue to be built while negotiate out the details of this variance? As well as I presume if this new proposal is rejected, they'll go back to the previous plan without having to stop work on it? Just from the design alone suggests a big phat yes...but I'm not sure how that all really works or if it's that easy.
 
vinny_the_hack said:
I admit that I know nothing about financing of projects such as this, but I do know that I read that it's about a billion dollar project, so should I be surprised that it is about 100% financed?
Click to expand...
The charge shows the maximum loan commitment, not what's advanced. Also, the Aviva charge may not be a loan. Revenue from this project should be over 1 billion.
 
interchange42 said:
There are now 15 storeys proposed in the uppermost section.

42
Click to expand...
Yes, my post was just referencing the similar 12 residential levels in the upper-most 'volume'* of the old and new renders. I acknowledged that the top 3 storeys (unknown uses?) above those 12 residential levels were likely not present in the older render... in fact I quoted a respected UT moderator to that effect. 12 + 3. :)

*volume meaning floors between louvered breaks.
 
Last edited:
UtakataNoAnnex said:
Silly question time: I presume this building will continue to be built while negotiate out the details of this variance? As well as I presume if this new proposal is rejected, they'll go back to the previous plan without having to stop work on it? Just from the design alone suggests a big phat yes...but I'm not sure how that all really works or if it's that easy.
Click to expand...
Yes, as stated in (ahem) the front page story, this building will continue to be built while this zoning by-law amendment (not a variance) is sought.
3Dementia said:
Yes, my post was just referencing the similar 12 residential levels in the upper-most 'volume'* of the old and new renders. I acknowledged that the top 3 storeys (unknown uses?) above those 12 residential levels were likely not present in the older render... in fact I quoted a respected UT moderator to that effect. 12 + 3. :)

*volume meaning floors between louvered breaks.
Click to expand...
It is known what's planned for the top three storeys (four actually, when you include the roof garden level): four four-storey penthouses, one on each corner.

42
 
interchange42 said:
Yes, as stated in (ahem) the front page story, this building will continue to be built while this zoning by-law amendment (not a variance) is sought.
Click to expand...
Yeah...sorry for being a pain in asking that. I did finally get that blurb after reading the story several times - I guess I was being overly excited on the onset over this. Hence, the silly question disclaimer at the beginning. >.<

...thanks for answering my question though. /bows
 
Was this planned all along...? You'd think a lot of the building engineering would have had to make provisions for these extra floors/units?

Seems very strange was to do things! If the application is denied, you run the risk of overspending on infrastructure that was not needed for the project.
 
Interesting to note that if approved, this will eclipse the original 318 metre proposal from 2015.
Below are two images showing the new height in context, which now towers over One Bloor East by a significant margin.

50802466367_67102772b9_k.jpg

50801607183_cc8e30ca2a_k.jpg
 
Excellent graphics as usual steveve!

Here is my take on the new height:

Toronto Model 01-04-21 The One.png
 
It would've been nice if the extra 3 floors and some of the roof feature were used to create a 3rd hanger section in the top quadrant of the new design. Each hanger section is 19.8m tall, so we have plenty of room for this third hanger section. Might give done additional symmetry to the design.

Some quick phone editing below:

PicsArt_01-05-12.45.22.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top