HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum
     
Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #301  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2006, 9:16 AM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
From: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...l=969048863851
__________________________
Quote:
Suburbs sold as hedge against disaster
Some downtown firms taking back-up office space in 905
`Hot seats' offer protection from terrorists or catastrophe
Apr. 22, 2006. 09:46 AM
DAVID BRUSER
BUSINESS REPORTER

The suburbs, known for box stores, sprawling subdivisions and strip malls, are now being sold as a geographic hedge against a terrorist attack or other office-crippling disaster.

Mississauga-based Fusepoint, along with Q9 Networks, is already known as a major player in the business of helping firms run their information-technology infrastructures.
But Fusepoint is now offering what it calls a "hot seat," or remote office for rent, from an 85,000-square-foot headquarters on Millcreek Dr., west of Erin Mills Parkway. The premise: businesses in Toronto's heavily populated downtown are arguably more at risk from various threats, and the 905 area offers relative safety and security.
"I think that's common logic," said George Kerns, Fusepoint's president and chief executive officer. "If somebody was going to do something, a premeditated (act) that none of us wants to think about, it's most likely to happen in a densely populated city centre."
The building, once owned by the Toronto Dominion Bank, is outfitted with bullet-proof glass near the reception desk and has boulders on the lawn to slow any vehicles barrelling in.
"If you're in the middle of a crisis, you're looking for a dependable space," Kerns said. "Our building has a lot of security protection. Buying a former bank building was a good thing to do."
The 25-seat area, built a few months ago, offers desks, phones, computers, Ethernet connections and printer — enough for a skeleton crew to carry out a company's basic, critical functions.
Backing up data is only half of a disaster-recovery plan, Kerns said.
"The other part of the equation (that) I think people forgot about: What about my people? If, for some reason, there was some kind of dirty bomb set off downtown, and people could not (be) downtown for I don't know how many days, what would they do?"
Some might try to work from home. Kerns's scenario, however, could include widespread utility failures. But Fusepoint can operate on backup power, if need be.
The sideline business is available only to current Fusepoint customers with IT infrastructure already fully or partly managed at the Mississauga site.
"Now that we have this facility in place, part of our sales process is to introduce that" to customers, Kerns said, but added, "This is not hotel property where you can call up and make a reservation. We see this as complementary to other things we're doing for people."
A customer can reserve a seat for a "nominal fee" of less than $100 a month. If a disaster strikes, the seat becomes available to the renter for several hundred dollars a day. Richard Barnowski, president of Equity Transfer Services Inc. on Adelaide St. W. in Toronto, said his company rents five of the 25 seats at Fusepoint.
"We do back-office operations for the securities industry. We need an alternative site outside the downtown core if there was a flood on this floor, if there was a fire, if there was a blackout," he said. "Our clients require shareholder lists, information about their shareholder base. We're under a tight time frame."
Barnowski added that many of his competitors operate within a six-block radius, and most have offices in different cities that can take on more work if a downtown Toronto office goes down. Barnowski does not.
"If I'm down and they're up, I'm in jeopardy," he said.
Q9 Networks chief executive Osama Arafat said his firm's Brampton office has rented out seats since the 2003 blackout on a dedicated basis, as opposed to a "shared risk" model, which he said could leave a hot-seat renter without an office space during a desperate time.
"We don't believe in overselling. The premise (behind the shared-risk model) is the disaster is going to affect only one company at the time. But it doesn't always tend to be that way."
But Fusepoint said the company also rents a few more expensive dedicated seats to a few firms. Such seats can be used by one renter and no one else. Fusepoint also said it can ramp up operations to meet an increased demand for shared hot seats with fully equipped mobile trailers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #302  
Old Posted Apr 23, 2006, 5:26 PM
Tom In Chicago's Avatar
Tom In Chicago Tom In Chicago is offline
Moderator
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Sick City
Posts: 6,374
^That is the most absurd thing I have read in a long long time. . . disaster recovery is one thing, but this kind of paranoia goes well beyond due dilligence. . .
__________________
Tom in Chicago
. . .
Near the day of Purification, there will be cobwebs spun back and forth in the sky.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #303  
Old Posted Apr 26, 2006, 7:07 PM
neilioo's Avatar
neilioo neilioo is offline
Super duper illustrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Wiarton/Toronto
Posts: 170
thats just retarded! I agree with Tom, PARANOIA!
__________________
TORONTO
2,065 Total, 1,650 completed, 220 proposed, 79 approved, 52 Under construction

I used to be a schizphrenic, but we're okay now


My SSP diagram
http://www.skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m15179
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #304  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2006, 9:14 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
From: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...Story/National
_________________________
Quote:
Union Station deal collapses
JENNIFER LEWINGTON
CITY HALL BUREAU CHIEF
The city's $150-million deal to refurbish Union Station, dogged by controversy during the past five years, is dead.

The deal's collapse, announced yesterday by the city and its private-sector partner in separate press releases, is occurring just weeks before the two sides were to wrap up the last details of the agreement by May 31 -- a deadline imposed by council last year.

Mayor David Miller, while expressing regret, told reporters late yesterday he is not prepared to ask council to grant another extension to get the project back on the rails. Such a request would need the support of two-thirds of council's 44 members.

"I don't think an extension is really going to solve the problem," he said.

"It is regrettable, but it is time for us to move on."

In theory, the two sides still have until May 31 to pull a political rabbit out of the hat to save the 100-year lease agreement.

But neither city officials nor a spokesman for Union Pearson Group, the six-member consortium selected by the city in 2003 to refurbish Union Station, held out any real hope.

"We just ran out of time," Union Pearson spokesman Ron Taylor said. He said the consortium's investors and lenders need time to reach a range of agreements -- still under negotiation -- between the city and others.

For example, the city needs to complete a lease agreement with GO Transit and Via Rail, both major tenants of Union Station, a 1920s-era heritage building and the most important passenger rail transportation hub in the country.

In addition, the city still does not have an agreement with the federal government on the makeup of a new public-sector agency to oversee the proposed renewal of the building.

The revitalization of Union Station was predicated on expanded capacity for transit commuters and a refurbishment of the building's interior to make it a new shopping and entertainment destination linking downtown Toronto to the waterfront.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #305  
Old Posted Apr 27, 2006, 9:15 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
From: http://www.thestar.com/NASApp/cs/Con...2154&t=TS_Home
_____________________________
Quote:
Union Station's reno deal crumbles
Private plan in works for 6 years
Miller refuses another extension
Apr. 26, 2006. 06:28 AM
PAUL MOLONEY AND DONOVAN VINCENT
CITY HALL BUREAU

The 100,000 commuters who use Union Station each day may have to live with the crumbling structure for years to come after a deal to renovate the building fell apart.
After nearly six years of talks, a $100 million-plus plan to transform Toronto's Union Station into a transportation showpiece collapsed yesterday.
Union Pearson Group, the private consortium selected to do the work, announced yesterday it could not meet the city's May 31 deadline to finalize the deal.
The consortium is prepared to keep working if an extension of unspecified length were granted by city council, Union Pearson project director Ron Taylor said yesterday.
But Mayor David Miller declined.
"Council bent over backwards to provide extension after extension," he said yesterday. "There was a deadline set, it was a fair deadline and this building's too important to keep it essentially in a holding pattern."
Restoring Union Station is considered a key initiative for Toronto. The building is a historic landmark, a vital transportation hub and a crucial part of the city's downtown. It is a destination point for the TTC, VIA Rail and GO Transit and will one day have a rail link to Pearson airport. But the structure is in desperate need of repairs and upgrades.
Miller wouldn't say whether the city would now look for a new private sector partner or carry out renovations on its own.
"Until May 31, the city shouldn't be speculating on what we're going to do without them because we have a legal obligation to negotiate with them in good faith until then."
Union Pearson won the job over a Chicago-based group that is now suing the city, claiming the selection process was flawed.
Taylor, meanwhile, noted councillors have said the city can't afford the $30 million to $40 million in basic repairs the station needs, let alone come up with the $100 million or so to redevelop the transportation hub.
The plans, in the works since the city took over the property in 2000, call for new restaurants, 130,000 square feet of retail space, entertainment venues and the rail link to Pearson.
While Miller and Taylor expressed disappointment, former Toronto mayor John Sewell, who has been a persistent and vocal critic of the Union Pearson deal, was delighted.
"I think it keeps falling apart because it's a dumb idea," said Sewell. Sewell argued that the focus should be on improving the transportation hub — wider platforms, new escalators, a new roof — instead of developing the commercial areas.
Despite yesterday's announcement, Councillor Sylvia Watson said she believes all is not lost.
Such work could be done piecemeal, said Watson, who chairs council's administration committee.
The issue heads back to council's administration and planning committees, with staff reporting back with recommendations, Watson said.
Union Pearson's investors and lenders need to see a completed implementation plan, review leases with GO and VIA, and examine the makeup of the board that will oversee the new facility.
Taylor estimated it would take 30 to 45 days for his side to go over the leases and there isn't enough time.
"What we would want is a commitment to expedite these processes," he told reporters. "We're prepared to stay at the table. We've said very clearly that we want to do this deal."
Miller, meanwhile, said the city is not to blame for delays.
"We would be in a position to deliver all our obligations by the deadline," he said. "It's my understanding from speaking to Union Pearson that a small extension wouldn't solve the problem. My understanding is that Union Pearson needs quite a bit of time, after the city meets its obligations, to meet theirs."
Taylor said the private consortium has spent $7 million to $8 million to get this far.
The complexity of restoring the historic landmark was a major obstacle, said Janice Etter, chair of the Union Station Revitalization Public Advisory Group.
"You have so many overlapping jurisdictions,'' she said in an interview. Leaving Union Station as it is isn't an option, she said.
"The station is in desperate need of repairs, never mind restoration. But the city isn't in a good financial situation right now," she added.
Councillor Doug Holyday, who firmly believes the Union Station proposal was sound, cited windows and plumbing in need of upgrades.
"But that doesn't give it the facelift it really needs, that's just maintaining it,'' he said.
The city is looking at losing an opportunity to showcase the station, Holyday said.
It was going to be an attraction for residents and tourists visiting Toronto, he said. The derailing of the deal sends a message the city isn't interested in working with the private sector on projects like this, he said.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #306  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2006, 4:04 PM
Tony's Avatar
Tony Tony is offline
Super Moderator / Sr. Committee
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 5,998
Some of the "smaller" stuff that may have been overlooked:

751-775 King St. W.
16 Storeys (49.9m)
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0404/it005.pdf

99 Blue Jays Way
27 Storeys (92.9 m)

http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0404/it031.pdf

3857-3867 Lake Shore Blvd. W. & 96 Forty First Street
16 Storeys with 5 storey base.(54.5 m)
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0404/it007.pdf

28 Orchid Place Dr.
2 Towers - 16 Storeys (47.8m)
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0404/it018.pdf

1030 McNicoll Ave.
17 Storeys (55.1m)
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0404/it022.pdf

All from April council / committee meetings
__________________
Hunan, China 1 | Hunan, China 2 | Hong Kong | NYC 2 | NYC 1 | Florence | Venice | Rome | London | Paris


Flickr®

Last edited by Tony; May 2, 2006 at 2:55 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #307  
Old Posted Apr 28, 2006, 7:55 PM
Tony's Avatar
Tony Tony is offline
Super Moderator / Sr. Committee
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 5,998
__________________
Hunan, China 1 | Hunan, China 2 | Hong Kong | NYC 2 | NYC 1 | Florence | Venice | Rome | London | Paris


Flickr®

Last edited by Tony; Apr 28, 2006 at 8:04 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #308  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2006, 3:15 AM
neilioo's Avatar
neilioo neilioo is offline
Super duper illustrator
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Wiarton/Toronto
Posts: 170
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tony
looks like im going to half to change the height and a few other minor things on my diagram.
__________________
TORONTO
2,065 Total, 1,650 completed, 220 proposed, 79 approved, 52 Under construction

I used to be a schizphrenic, but we're okay now


My SSP diagram
http://www.skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?m15179
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #309  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2006, 12:42 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
From: http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...Story/National
____________________________
City, private partner blame each other for collapse of Union Station deal
JENNIFER LEWINGTON
CITY HALL BUREAU CHIEF
When the deal to revitalize Union Station fell apart this week, it had already been on life support for months.

Now the city's five-year effort to renew the landmark transportation hub with a private-sector partner is all but legally dead.

After years of controversy and delay, the city and Union Pearson Group lost faith in each other's ability to cross the finish line, a May 31 deadline to close the deal.

"We simply ran out of time," UPG spokesman Ron Taylor said.

Pressed, he said "UPG and all of the stakeholders have lost confidence in the city's ability to deliver the things we need to do this."

"This is a story about money," said one city source, questioning whether the consortium was ready to put up funds to proceed.

Though technically alive, the consortium crumbled in recent months as several members, some with new owners, opted out of the project.

"We are not in a position to put up equity," said Cubie Dawson, a senior official with New York-based Jones Lang LaSalle, a consortium co-founder now active only as a project consultant. "We have other investments we're looking at."

A spokeswoman for Brookfield Properties, which bought consortium member O&Y Properties Corp. last fall, said "we have no involvement" in the project. A spokeswoman for Oxford Properties, the real estate arm of OMERS (another UPG founder), said "we are no longer part of the consortium."

Consortium officials, who stress the six members technically remain as shareholders, dismiss the finance question as a "red-herring."

Instead, they blame the city for failing to produce key legal documents for the closing.

City officials are still negotiating leases with GO Transit and Via Rail, and drafting terms of a new governing body for the station. The city says it will meet obligations to prepare the documents by May 31.

That's not good enough, said John Levitt, a senior consultant to UPG. "I don't believe it is appropriate for the city to table these documents at the 11th hour and expect UPG to deal with lenders and investors at this late date."

He blames Mayor David Miller. "For the last 2½ years, the political signals we were getting from the mayor's office is that 'we want to see this deal happen.'

"When we asked for help . . . we got none," Mr. Levitt said.

One result of the deal's demise is the loss of the Ontario Archives as a possible tenant in Union Station, one of four sites short-listed by the province. UPG recently bid to house the archives in the west wing of the station, but needed more time to revise the consortium's original concept plans for that area.

At city hall this delay was not viewed as a deal breaker. But it was another hiccup in a drawn-out exercise that, rushed at the beginning, seemed doomed at the end.

In 2000, the city purchased Union Station, with a plan that included turning it into a tourist destination.

In 2002, Union Pearson Group won the job to renew it under a 100-year lease, beating a Chicago-based consortium.

But the selection immediately came under fire from critics, later enraged that key documents tied to the secret selection process had been shredded. In 2003, a review by the provincial Integrity Commissioner concluded that the process, though flawed, was fair.

Last November, council set a firm date of May 31 to complete the deal.

The deal died on Monday.

Consortium chairman Larry Tanenbaum, at a meeting with Mr. Miller, appealed for the mayor to win council backing to extend the deadline for three or four months.

Mr. Miller declined, citing three earlier extensions. His decision astonished council critics, who assumed he had the votes to buy time.

"I felt a couple of years ago we should move in another direction," said administration committee chair Sylvia Watson.

The clearest sign of council's political will was the silence that followed this week's news. Despite lopsided votes for the project during the past five years, including one in February, no councillor was ready to fight for an extension.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #310  
Old Posted Apr 29, 2006, 12:46 PM
SSLL's Avatar
SSLL SSLL is offline
samsonyuen
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: Canary Wharf->CityPlace
Posts: 4,241
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servl...Story/National
_______________________
What's in a name? For soccer fans, a lot
Toronto's new major league team aims for old-world cachet and a unified fan base

PAUL MATTHEWS
Special to The Globe and Mail
In a league littered with such familiar-sounding clubs as Real Salt Lake (think Spain's storied Real Madrid) and D.C. United (hello Manchester United), it's fitting that Toronto's first Major League Soccer franchise should also seek a bit of overseas magic.

So last week when Maple Leaf Sports and Entertainment -- which will be fielding a Toronto MLS team next April -- unveiled its shortlist of potential names, it was no surprise that the selections had a hint of international yearning: Inter Toronto FC, The Toronto Reds, The Toronto Northmen FC, The Toronto Nationals and Toronto FC. (FC stands for Football Club.) The fruit of six months of market research is now being hashed out by fans in an on-line poll at http://www.torontoprosoccer.com.

On paper, Inter Toronto FC -- a nod to the Italian League's Inter Milan -- appears to be a calculated appeal to the city's 425,000-strong Italian community. And the name's supporters already have their arguments ready. Inter Milan was originally formed by Swiss and Italian players from what became rival AC Milan who objected to the team's policy of signing only locals, explains Joe Russo, a commentator on Telelatino's Sunday Night Soccer Fanatics show. "Inter is short for Internazionale, which means bringing together players from every country. Given Toronto's multicultural makeup, the name makes sense."

MLSE Executive Vice-President Tom Alsemi, who is overseeing the poll, admits the merit of Inter Toronto lies in its Italian roots. "Most people who look at [Inter Toronto]," he says, "gravitate to Inter Milan and Italian football . . . Those clubs have a hundred years of brand equity, where we're trying to launch something new. I see the Inter name as trying to make this look more like traditional soccer."

Still, Mr. Alsemi says, it's a double-edged sword. "There is a risk of alienating other ethnic communities who may be loyal to some other soccer franchise."

Unfortunately, the other possibilities don't hold much more promise of uniting Torontonians. The Toronto Reds might suggest Communist sympathies, but it's a nod to the soccer tradition of identifying clubs by their colours -- in this case the red of the Canadian flag. The Northmen name, meanwhile, harkens back to a never-ran Toronto World Football League team whose opening season Prime Minister Pierre Trudeau blocked in 1974.

Mr. Alsemi doubts the Reds or the Northmen will be front-runners. Meanwhile, the Toronto Nationals will be an awkward choice if MLS teams sprout up in Vancouver or Montreal. That leaves Toronto FC, which is generic, but at least follows the European naming tradition.

Mr. Alsemi won't reveal which way MLSE is leaning, saying he'll await the poll results. Even then, he emphasizes, "this will not be a vote" -- the results will not necessarily determine the final name.

That may be a good thing, as more than 200 people have added their own suggestions on-line. There may still be hope, then, for our pick: How about Globe Toronto FC?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #311  
Old Posted May 2, 2006, 2:48 PM
Tony's Avatar
Tony Tony is offline
Super Moderator / Sr. Committee
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 5,998
More of those smaller highrises:

46 Spadina Ave. (Spadina & Wellington)
11 & 19 Storeys, 35.3m & 59.3m
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it005.pdf

BAY-ADELAIDE - Recommendation to designation to 347 Bay Street as a Heritage building
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...509/it006a.pdf

***70 Roehampton Ave.***
24 & 27 Storey, 86.5m (for the 27 storey bldg)

Also includes a new Secondary School
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it029.pdf

1233 Yonge St.
9 Storey mixed-use, 27.97m
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it031.pdf

***13 Balmuto*** aka CrystalBlu - Next door to Uptown Residences
Original 2004 proposal at 25 Storey, now 34 Storey, 126m
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it030.pdf

9 / 15 Bales Ave.
9 Storey, 25.6m - Density Transfer report.
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it030.pdf

475 Patricia Av.
10 Storey, 32.6m (Also described as a 14 storey?!)
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it039.pdf

103, 105, 109 Scarboro Ave. / 3070 Ellesmere
24 Storey mixed-use
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it023.pdf

1236 Birchmount Rd.
14 Storey, 51.24m (SLABTASTIC!)
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it024.pdf
__________________
Hunan, China 1 | Hunan, China 2 | Hong Kong | NYC 2 | NYC 1 | Florence | Venice | Rome | London | Paris


Flickr®

Last edited by Tony; May 2, 2006 at 3:03 PM.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #312  
Old Posted May 2, 2006, 3:05 PM
Tony's Avatar
Tony Tony is offline
Super Moderator / Sr. Committee
 
Join Date: Dec 2001
Location: Toronto, ON
Posts: 5,998
BTW,

Construction on Bay-Adelaide set to begin REAL soon:
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/a...0509/it042.pdf
__________________
Hunan, China 1 | Hunan, China 2 | Hong Kong | NYC 2 | NYC 1 | Florence | Venice | Rome | London | Paris


Flickr®
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #313  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 4:23 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,016
720ft office tower to go up in 2 weeks. - big deal.

hmmm.... Can we get a rendering please. of the new reduced tower.
__________________
Bangkok-Pattaya 2019
Singapore - October 2019
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #314  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 4:50 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltrane74
720ft office tower to go up in 2 weeks. - big deal.
sarcasm, i'm guessing?

anyway, i too would love to see a BA office tower rendering as well. i like what i've seen of the B&W elevations on the first page of this thread, but a proper rendered persepctive drawing (CG or otherwise) would be great.

why was it reduced from 779' to 720'?
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #315  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 5:47 PM
TOBoy TOBoy is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Posts: 701
The tower was originally 797 ft. and 62 floors. It began as a mixed use office and residential tower, although Im not sure what the split was between office and residential use. The second tower would be 53 floors and again a mixed use tower containing office and residential uses.

The new tower is 704 ft. from what can be identified on the planning reports and 51 floors, but this time it is all office use. The 53 floor east tower is now 43 floors and still mixed use I believe. Originally I think Brookfield only did a mixed use to get the largest possible tower on the lot with the highest return, but now they may have leased enough of the space in the tower to go ahead with one large office tower. Hopefully they will change their mind and make the east tower higher than 43 floors or else increase the residential space in their 49 floor north tower to make it taller.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #316  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 6:22 PM
caltrane74's Avatar
caltrane74 caltrane74 is offline
gettin' rich!
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: Toronto
Posts: 34,016
Seems for a 700ft tower its no big deal for Torontians. Everyone else seems pre-occupied with bigger and better things. I guess.

I would have thought people would actually care a big office tower is going up in our city . But they dont
__________________
Bangkok-Pattaya 2019
Singapore - October 2019
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #317  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 11:02 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 17,408
^Oh they will when construction/demolition actually begins
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #318  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 11:04 PM
Steely Dan's Avatar
Steely Dan Steely Dan is offline
devout Pizzatarian
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Lincoln Square, Chicago
Posts: 21,295
Quote:
Originally Posted by caltrane74
I would have thought people would actually care a big office tower is going up in our city . But they dont
well, for what it's worth, i care.

it looks like a pretty nice tower.
__________________
He has to go.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #319  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 11:08 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 17,408
its a underwhelming design but I'll take it over the stump
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #320  
Old Posted May 3, 2006, 11:09 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 17,408
Caltrane - probably can add the 40 storey, 600 foot Richmond Adelaide Centre 3 to your sig
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts

Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 6:43 PM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2019, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.