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

[Lenser]

AoD: stop it, you're ruining the narrative that robots are destroying Toronto.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

AoD: stop it, you're ruining the narrative that robots are destroying Toronto.

Well, we can always cast developers as robots instead That, or fanboys.

AoD

 

[Praxus]

Sorry, see Mirvish + Gehry - raising it to 90+ floors, and the rumoured changes to 1 Yonge.

AoD

You're right, the robot can add a couple of stories if you remove entire towers.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

You're right, the robot can add a couple of stories if you remove entire towers.

Your post:

It's just a robot that says "its too tall, wah" and asks the developer to cut back

Perhaps you need to program your hypothetical robot with better if/else-if decision-trees.

AoD

 

[adHominem]

Perhaps you need to program your hypothetical robot with better if/else-if decision-trees.

AoD

No, no, the robot has to also be capricious and infuriating. Since the whole point of this vast high-tech conspiracy is to make internet size-queens angry.

 

[Mike in TO]

Not sure how that narrative works for all the projects that go to the CofA and add a couple floors...

 

[ushahid]

and the rumoured changes to 1 Yonge.

AoD

Any chance of 1 yonge getting increase In height?
I don't mind if they drop one tower and add few floors to the taller tower to make it the tallest in the city. what do you guys think?

 

[interchange42]

Wrong thread.

42

 

[Benito]

Based on what is known, when would you project, guess, when this project might actually put shovel to the ground?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Benito:

Hopefully never in its current form - and then get a 1 Bloor kind of outcome.

AoD

 

[ushahid]

if that is the case I don't care if it gets build after ten years but the final product should be like One Bloor.

 

[Rational-tht]

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.

I'm all for development. Our City could use the influx of money. The influx of 100,000 residents within a 10 clock radius of the downtown core over 10 years is a bit daunting, and I wonder how the infrastructure and communities will deal with it. However, it's completely valid to protect vital sunshine from our not-so-vitally-deemed open spaces such as school playgrounds. If any of you are parents then your interest in your child's physical and mental development is likely more important to you than a skyscraper development (one would hope).
There are many studies around the world and in Canada isolating the need for sunshine for the development of bone density, eye development, mental health, energy and vitality for the specific needs of children.

There are many in the Toronto area putting pressure on our government to protect these spaces by labeling them "vital green spaces and parks." And so they should.
This trend to pay off the TDSB and make section 37 deals to offset the shadow impacts on school grounds is eventually going to leave all of our school's parks (and greenery) in the dark. What child wants to play in the cold shadow of a concrete jungle?

~ respectfully

 

[am29]

whats the height they're looking aat for this project?

 

[Automation Gallery]

whats the height they're looking aat for this project?

i believe 230 meters

 

[am29]

i believe 230 meters

Thanks, anyone know how much it has to be decreased to limit the shadow impact on the school?