Toronto Theatre Park | 156.96m | 47s | Lamb Dev Corp | a—A

dt_toronto_geek said:
I thought the same thing last weekend, surely he'd get it.
Click to expand...

Based on what? To match a yet full-formed proposal for a set of buildings that may not even get built, and one that certainly has not gone through any formal development process?

I think Theatre Park will be largely finished before one brick is removed from the Mirvish site.
 
gristle said:
Based on what? To match a yet full-formed proposal for a set of buildings that may not even get built, and one that certainly has not gone through any formal development process?

I think Theatre Park will be largely finished before one brick is removed from the Mirvish site.
Click to expand...

If I were BL I'd have had my application for 3 additional floors in by 5pm last Friday considering what is being proposed to the west. Will Mirvish get 85s? Maybe, maybe not but he'll get a whole lot more than 50s so why not squeeze out three more floors at Theatre Park? The costs are minimal compared to the returns and I'd wager that the application is a safe gamble.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Hahaha, im willing to bet.... that Toronto City Planning is hoping that the Gehry thing is one big bad dream, and wishing that it all goes away:D
Click to expand...

Probably true! It's getting a lot of press, most of it very good so they can't screw with it too much plus the project involves demolishing three heritage designated buildings and a beloved theatre, potentially three buildings with huge height (so much for their stupid "skyline tapering" policy), very likely infrastructure improvements required and at least a decade of traffic disruption along King W. if the project sells and the market doesn't tank.
 
from today
20121103007.jpg


20121103046.jpg
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
Probably true! It's getting a lot of press, most of it very good so they can't screw with it too much plus the project involves demolishing three heritage designated buildings and a beloved theatre, potentially three buildings with huge height (so much for their stupid "skyline tapering" policy), very likely infrastructure improvements required and at least a decade of traffic disruption along King W. if the project sells and the market doesn't tank.
Click to expand...


Someone's going to build something eventually. Why not have a (set) nice building(s) from a renowned designer...?
 
It's above ground! I haven't been on King West since TIFF, when I last looked down into the parking structure. Looking forward to seeing this one rise. It always amazes me how they can work in such close quarters.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Automation Gallery said:
Oh please, you know what i mean
... that proposed development is out of the ordinary for this area, and many will not be very happy to deal with it.
Click to expand...

How would you know what the planners think? This proposal is very early on in its process. It's not about planners being happy or unhappy about a proposal, it's about doing their jobs responsibly.
 
gristle said:
How would you know what the planners think? This proposal is very early on in its process. It's not about planners being happy or unhappy about a proposal, it's about doing their jobs responsibly.
Click to expand...

One thing I do know is Planners have to deal with the Councillor and attend public consultation meetings. With this being such a ground breaking proposal in Toronto in terms of density alone the Planner can't be having an easy one with this, what with all of the EA's, studies, consultations with different city services etc. and I think that was probably AG's point.
 
Some planners might feel this way, since there's a huge spotlight and a lot of pressure to approve a large-scale proposal like Gehry, but others like that kind of challenge.

wrt to increased height for Theatre Park, remember that the planners recommended against it originally and council voted against it, but it was settled at the OMB.

http://news.nationalpost.com/2010/11/10/lamb-wins-battle-for-king-st-tower/
When it first came up for approval in March, city staff voiced strong opposition to a height they believed overwhelmed the street and could jeopardize heritage buildings on the block by essentially making the conditions right for developers to snap them up and convert them into condo blocks.
Click to expand...

here's the original staff report
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2010/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-27649.pdf
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top