Toronto 8 Elm | 218.2m | 69s | Reserve Properties | Arcadis

cd concept said:
Then most of the blame should be placed on council etc. For stopping or changing the original ideas.
Click to expand...
Council has nothing whatsoever to do with the quality of the architecture, or the outside appearance of a building, if you want to put it that way: @Mongo was even talking about that on the previous page. The City has not been given the power by the Province to reject or approve buildings based on their looks.

Council can only make its decision based on planning merits. There is a lengthy process that proposals go through, overseen by the Planning Department, that checks things such as density, massing, shadowing, wind generation, transportation, servicing, etc., and either shapes the proposal into something that the department makes a positive recommendation upon, or if they don't agree with the developer's final plans, they recommend rejection based on those things. Council follows the Planning Department's recommendation 99% of the time.

42
 
LPAT or OMB? Which is it? Would someone please answer my question?

The new LPAT will dramatically empower the local councillor and thus city council and the planning department so this is a critical point for this or any new proposal downtown.
 
LMVDR said:
LPAT or OMB? Which is it? Would someone please answer my question?

The new LPAT will dramatically empower the local councillor and thus city council and the planning department so this is a critical point for this or any new proposal downtown.
Click to expand...
This first got proposed in July 2016, so it should fall under the previous OMB rules
 
cd concept said:
Then most of the blame should be placed on council etc. For stopping or changing the original ideas.
Click to expand...

The idea from inception of plopping an 80 storey tower into a quality heritage street front is questionable from nearly every angle including planning and taste. I can only think of density for density's sake and height for height's sake in terms of this being a positive.
 
Screen Shot 2019-04-23 at 3.03.46 PM.png
 
Automation Gallery said:
Why not? it's not like the area is going to lack height
Click to expand...
Because, as as been discussed at length in this thread, the lot is tiny, and even with the recent assembly of adjacent Yonge Street properties, the density ask here was way beyond what Toronto's tall building guidelines and TOcore call for…

…but don't let a couple of planning goals for the city stop you from grasping at tall taller tallest even taller than that.

42
 
Amare said:
Heck even at 67s, the proposal is way to damn high for this site.
Click to expand...

All one can say definitively is that it's too tall for the guidelines. Too tall for the site is a matter of personal taste/comfort level. What's clear is that there's a wide range of preferences.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top