Toronto The One | 308.6m | 85s | Tridel | Foster + Partners

A poor attempt to lower the FSI. City will see through it though, that site can just be sold off to whoever develops the rest of the block and be used again to calculate the FSI of that site.
 
innsertnamehere said:
A poor attempt to lower the FSI. City will see through it though, that site can just be sold off to whoever develops the rest of the block and be used again to calculate the FSI of that site.
Click to expand...

Good point - I would have loved to see the Rogers site acquired and the podium extended southward but too bad that's not going to be the case.

AoD
 
Big Daddy said:
I for one am very disappointed that this exciting proposal has been chopped to mere mortal status. For once in a very long time a developer has the temerity to propose something bold and daring, something very suitable for the most important intersection in Canada and when it gets chopped - as seems to be the inevitable fate of any great proposal here - you accept it without any fight or resistance. Your non-reaction is far more disappointing even than the reduction of this project. You're like a jar of fleas that have been trained to only jump so high and never expect or dream of more. Throughout this massive building boom we've experienced, there have been precious few projects to get excited about - the vast majority being nothing more than a large swath of underwhelming apartment buildings. Once in a rare while someone is daring enough to push the envelope and when the plan is reduced, this crowd sits back and accepts it like children afraid of being scolded for speaking out. Well bravo for your brave and unrelenting defense of a one hour shadow over a dog park. This building may look fine when it is done, but like the rest of this city's architecture, it will be neither outstanding or nor memorable - not "The One" but just Another One.
Click to expand...

Expand your horizons. Lot of very interesting planning & development, architecture books to read. I don't know if you'd be less dissatisfied by the boom but, at you'd have a broader understanding of what height means. You're obsessing about something you don't really understand.

There nothing to suggest the reduction has anything to do with a park but, even if it did, you're looking at it from an individual project and not the sum of all potential projects that will add to a lot more than one hour of shade. I do enjoy the denial when it's just as likely the equity players pulled the plug on Mizrahi's aspirations once the budget was figured out. As absurd as it sounds to blame planners, they are the perfect scapegoat for this ridiculous obsession. They are there to design a great city which is a lot more than just a collection of tall buildings.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Something caught my eyes with the plan (Architectural Plans from the Dec 2015 submission):

So 764 Yonge (the old Uptown entrance, now Rogers) isn't part of the project assembly but the next lot down is? What's going on?

AoD
Click to expand...
innsertnamehere said:
A poor attempt to lower the FSI. City will see through it though, that site can just be sold off to whoever develops the rest of the block and be used again to calculate the FSI of that site.
Click to expand...
Yes, it lowers the FSI, but it was also explained that it is opposite the east-west portion of the lane entrance from Balmuto, and would, if the City demanded more vehicle access to the lane, allow them to remove what's there now so that there could be another vehicle access point. I have no idea what Transportation Service's response is to that yet. They won't want the added crossing of the sidewalk, but they might deem the current amount of vehicular access to be insufficient.

42
 
LNahid2000 said:
What's with you bashing Toronto in almost all of your posts? I've been to cities with 500m+ buildings and although their skyline photos look nice, I'd never actually want to live in these cities. The pedestrian experience is so bad in places like Dubai or in Shanghai's financial district, and this is a lot more important to me than just having tall buildings.
Click to expand...

Why are you so easily hurt?
I only stated the facts 1) Y/B is not the most important intersection in Canada; 2) two subways don't make a "transit hub" 3) 341m was never a impressive height. Any of these wrong? If you consider this Toronto bashing, well, you need to see a therapist.

I totally agree Shanghai's Luijiazui where most the tallest towers stand has horrible pedestrian experience. I avoid that area by all means because it is so sterile. Shanghai's most interesting areas lie on the other side of the river where there are not too many supertalls. However that doesn't change the fact 341m was not that tall or iconic to start with, so there is no point in obsessing with it even if one loves nothing but height. Toronto was and is no exciting place for "height junkies". Nobody in the world cares if Toronto adds a 341m tower or a 304m one. It makes zero difference so get over it.

As to the One, as long as the design remains excellent and the street level provides good vibrancy, losing 37 meters means absolutely nothing. I would not care if it were reduced to 200m. The One was never meant to impress people with its height to start with.
 
I'm late to the show, but I've got a series of probably dumb questions: this is a condo tower right? Probably a super-expensive one, yes? With zero balconies? Not even a hint of them in the renders? I know it's not a requirement, but really am I missing something?
 
ksun said:
Why are you so easily hurt?
I only stated the facts 1) Y/B is not the most important intersection in Canada; 2) two subways don't make a "transit hub" 3) 341m was never a impressive height. Any of these wrong? If you consider this Toronto bashing, well, you need to see a therapist.
Click to expand...
I was referring to your posts on this forum in general. Also, lol @ you judging my mental state now.

ksun said:
As to the One, as long as the design remains excellent and the street level provides good vibrancy, losing 37 meters means absolutely nothing. I would not care if it were reduced to 200m. The One was never meant to impress people with its height to start with.
Click to expand...
304m still makes it the tallest building in Canada. It's still a pretty big deal for Toronto.
 
ksun said:
1) Y/B is not the most important intersection in Canada; 2) two subways don't make a "transit hub" 3) 341m was never a impressive height.
Click to expand...
1) Debatable, it's easily in the top 5, maybe even top 3.
2) In this city it does.
3) In this city it is.

I would not care if it were reduced to 200m. The One was never meant to impress people with its height to start with.
Click to expand...

I respectfully disagree. I Like the design overall but I feel like the design was supposed to bring attention to its verticality.

I don't think "the sky is falling" or anything like a lot of people here seem to be accusing others of acting, but I can't say I'm not disappointed in the reduction, whatever the reasons for it were. I of course agree that the street level is the most important but I do enjoy some standout height (even though I'm *gasp!* not a tourist or 905er!!!).
 
Orson said:
I'm late to the show, but I've got a series of probably dumb questions: this is a condo tower right? Probably a super-expensive one, yes? With zero balconies? Not even a hint of them in the renders? I know it's not a requirement, but really am I missing something?
Click to expand...

There are inset balconies on the residential part of the tower. At one point the rendering showed them to have glass panels that could open or close the spaces up to the outdoors.
 
Really? I don't see any inset balconies in the most recent renders...
 
Red October said:
1) Debatable, it's easily in the top 5, maybe even top 3.
2) In this city it does.
3) In this city it is.



I respectfully disagree. I Like the design overall but I feel like the design was supposed to bring attention to its verticality.

I don't think "the sky is falling" or anything like a lot of people here seem to be accusing others of acting, but I can't say I'm not disappointed in the reduction, whatever the reasons for it were. I of course agree that the street level is the most important but I do enjoy some standout height (even though I'm *gasp!* not a tourist or 905er!!!).
Click to expand...

Think you read my post wrong. I don't think one posters has mentioned they are not a little disappointed. It's those ready to burn people at stake or compromise public space or any other community amenity for a little bit of height... pretty much only care exclusively about height ... that I wonder may not live anywhere nearby.
 
ksun said:
I totally agree Shanghai's Luijiazui where most the tallest towers stand has horrible pedestrian experience. I avoid that area by all means because it is so sterile. Shanghai's most interesting areas lie on the other side of the river where there are not too many supertalls. However that doesn't change the fact 341m was not that tall or iconic to start with, so there is no point in obsessing with it even if one loves nothing but height. Toronto was and is no exciting place for "height junkies". Nobody in the world cares if Toronto adds a 341m tower or a 304m one. It makes zero difference so get over it.
Click to expand...

Are you even in Toronto?

... and how are asian cities with super-tall/horrible pedestrian realm combinations of any relevance to Yonge and Bloor?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top