Toronto 123 Edward | 189.05m | 59s | Crown Realty Partners | Turner Fleischer

3 Elevators for 1000+ Units? What in the actual hell are we doing in this province?

This development *should* (wishful thinking) be a catalyst for reform in building policy in Ontario because that's the most asinine and ridiculous thing i've ever heard of in my life. There needs to be elevator standards in this province, enough with this utter BS. It's coming to the point developers just want to make people live in cattle like environments, actually I shouldnt even say "live", they just want to cram people in a building and call it a day.
 
Irishmonk said:
This proposal could be the moment Toronto developers crossed the line from everyday villainy to cartoonish supervillainy.
Click to expand...
Good thing the proposal is on Edward Street and not Elm Street one block to the north. It would truly be a nightmare if it were on Elm Street.
 
Johnny Au said:
Good thing the proposal is on Edward Street and not Elm Street one block to the north. It would truly be a nightmare if it were on Elm Street.
Click to expand...
Elm's a nicer street in general I find, it just needs some TLC.

Also, this proposal is....really something eh? It certainly tries to cram as much density as possible without caring about some really important city guidelines that are more poised toward livability and sustainable building practices.
 
123 Edward Street should be designated as heritage.

They should have converted the exiting office buildings to residential and connected them to a new tower that replaces the garage, all as a single connected building. So no demolition except for the garage. That's a solution I don't think anyone would object to.
 
Last edited:
AlbertC said:
Back in 2017, Crown Properties, had engaged Smart Density to come up with a potential redevelopment concept for that parking garage along Dundas. Not sure if it's still something along the future horizon, but here's what they came up with:

Click to expand...

^ Interesting that the redevelopment in your link proposed hybrid mass timber construction for this site.

Given the proximity to City Hall views, how about a mass timber complex of 2 towers + terraced levels … sending a low-environmental impact postcard from Toronto (see example below).

THE PLAN (donations accepted in support of city lobbying efforts):

1. Two taller point towers (with smaller floor plates), each terracing down to suit the footprints seen on the site plan. Note: tower separation issues fixed.

2. Retain the 123 Edward Street glass facade and rebuild behind with mass timber construction stepping down from the facade (includes a much larger office replacement element than proposed + other mixed-uses).

3. Lots of green growing all over the complex (think KING Toronto on steroids). @Northern Light will masterplan all the stuff that has to grow.

4. 1,500 residential units + office replacement + retail (1. charge a fortune for penthouses, 2. include afforable housing ;-).

Below: something bigger than this (use 780sqm tower floorplates) but similar (x 2) to the tower and terraces on the left of the image below (not the huge mid-rise mass in the centre of the image of course).

big-wood-skyscraper-1.jpg


Maybe not even a concrete core? More green building bonus points but engineers haven't returned my calls (nation-wide blackout with Rogers... again).
big-wood-skyscraper-2.jpg

Big Wood by Michael Charters for a 2013 Skyscraper Competition

Back in 2016 a timber super-tall skyscraper was proposed @ 300 metres in London.
Oakwood-Tower-by-PLP-Architecture-1-889x614.jpg

Link

As for City Hall view corridors, the existing proposal is "on the edge" of being problematic. The new plan will of course be celebrated by City Hall and around the world. (applause appreciated)
 
Johnny Au said:
Good thing the proposal is on Edward Street and not Elm Street one block to the north. It would truly be a nightmare if it were on Elm Street.
Click to expand...
Can anyone explain why a non offensive comment just giving a shout out to the funny comment / connection to Elm Street I posted was removed? I fail to see why it would have been removed??? Can someone please explain what the issue was? Mostly I contribute to 160 front but was a bit miffed when I noticed my comment here was removed.
 
Towered said:
Looks like this 70’s era office tower at Dundas and Chestnut is getting a cheap facelift - it’s being painted a slightly glossy gunmetal grey:

View attachment 401396
Click to expand...

While we await the disposition of this utterly preposterous proposal.................

A one pic update from July 8th, 2022, on what @Towered first reported on in post #1, namely the appearance change of the existing office tower fronting Dundas:

DSC08609.JPG
 
Amare said:
3 Elevators for 1000+ Units? What in the actual hell are we doing in this province?

This development *should* (wishful thinking) be a catalyst for reform in building policy in Ontario because that's the most asinine and ridiculous thing i've ever heard of in my life. There needs to be elevator standards in this province, enough with this utter BS. It's coming to the point developers just want to make people live in cattle like environments, actually I shouldnt even say "live", they just want to cram people in a building and call it a day.
Click to expand...
I saw the elevator situation mentioned on the Toronto reddit thread. It's actually insane that there are no regulations for that. One could argue that it's common sense to have a set number of elevators per residents/units but then it's business. Anything to drive profit. Who cares about the end users?

Do other provinces in Canada have such regulations?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top