Toronto 50 Bloor Street West | 230.11m | 70s | Morguard Corporation | Pellow + Associates

fedplanner said:
Yup! The buildings of new World Trade Center complex is laid out in such a way to maximize sunlight on the memorial during September 11. There is also concern in NYC regarding more shadows being cast on Central Park due to the ever increasing amount of tall buildings being approved, mainly a product of Bloomberg's support for rezoning.

What UTers may find interesting is the rhetoric out of the new Mayor, Bill de Blasio. He's calling for even taller buildings on the condition of affordable housing inclusion. This has really pissed off the NIMBYs, but has strong support amount affordable housing advocates, lower-income residents, and even the developers since receiving additional densities beyond what current zoning permits in exchange for affordable housing units is seen as a fair incentive. The first big test of the Mayor's plan was the Domino Sugar mega development in Brooklyn.

My thoughts- Toronto planners seem to put a disproportionate amount of weight on shadow impacts when evaluating tall developments, especially Jesie Ketchum which isn't sacrosanct. Come to think of it, this has caused a de facto height limit in several areas of the city.
Click to expand...

I'm not saying that taking shadows into account when when designing a tower isn't important; but to have a tower's height decreased because it casts shadows on a playground -- of all things -- is a bit ridiculous, in my opinion. Overall, I don't mind the decrease in height of this particular tower, as I find it pretty bland. The less noticeable it is, the better.
 
I'm not sure I would have appreciated the schoolyard where I grew up if it were always in shadow when I was outside for recess. There probably aren't that many schoolyards in the country where the kids don't have some access to sunshine at those times of the day. Why should Jesse Ketchum kids not get the same benefits outdoors as those at 99.99% of the other schools across the country.

I think the restrictions on shadows here are reasonable. Should the number crunching of some skyscraper geeks really trump the kids' enjoyment of their schoolyard?

42
 
Agreed. I confess to being a bit of a "geek" about height but the wellbeing of our children rates much higher among societal priorities for me.
 
Last edited:
interchange42 said:
I'm not sure I would have appreciated the schoolyard where I grew up if it were always in shadow when I was outside for recess. There probably aren't that many schoolyards in the country where the kids don't have some access to sunshine at those times of the day. Why should Jesse Ketchum kids not get the same benefits outdoors as those at 99.99% of the other schools across the country.

I think the restrictions on shadows here are reasonable. Should the number crunching of some skyscraper geeks really trump the kids' enjoyment of their schoolyard?
Click to expand...

That depends. How much of the schoolyard is shadowed, at what times of day? Looking at the map, the schoolyard is much larger than the shadow from any single building would be. Is it strictly required that ALL of the schoolyard be in sunlight? If not, what percentage of shadowing is acceptable, and why that specific percentage?
 
interchange42 said:
I'm not sure I would have appreciated the schoolyard where I grew up if it were always in shadow when I was outside for recess. There probably aren't that many schoolyards in the country where the kids don't have some access to sunshine at those times of the day. Why should Jesse Ketchum kids not get the same benefits outdoors as those at 99.99% of the other schools across the country.

I think the restrictions on shadows here are reasonable. Should the number crunching of some skyscraper geeks really trump the kids' enjoyment of their schoolyard?

42
Click to expand...

99.99% of schoolyards in Canada also aren't located in such dense areas.
 
^+1

Every city should have peaks and valleys in its skyline, and Jesse Ketchum is a reasonable spot for a valley because of its particular usage. It's part of the context which every developer buying land here, or redeveloping what they already own, is aware of.

42
 
I substantially underestimated the age of Jesse Ketchum. The present building is enjoying its centennial and it's history dates to to 1831 when its eponymous benefactor gave land in Yorkville for a school. Ketchum himself came to York in 1799 and established a tannery business and was obviously something of a land developer also. He was also a significant philanthropist in other ways, giving land for the original Knox Presbyterian Church and to the institutions of several other church bodies.

Land was abundant and cheap, of course, but obviously he was a developer with a social conscience and a concern for the welfare of the community. Something to be emulated, IMO.
 
West of Bay where the Roots used to be, I just came across this plastered across the retail front. Holts opening up a men's store. Maybe related to future construction and renovation of their existing store?

14642925160_7fb523078e_b.jpg
 
so excited that I cant wait to tell you guys that Caltrane just posted on ssp that 50 Bloor was approved. :D
 
it will be awesome to see many of the great projects start the construction at around same time.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top