Supertall rumours and speculation thread - Page 4

Ramako · #61 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 12:54 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osmo

I have word from a good source that there is indeed a firm plan for a building in the Financial District that will "surpass FCP". this firm has 2 projects in the works one will be Canada's first LEED Platinum Skyscraper, the other will be Toronto and Canada's first Supertall.

How will it be in the Financial District? After Bay-Adelaide East, 100 Adelaide and INDX Condos, the whole district is already fully built out.

Vertigo3000 · #62 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 1:19 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramako

How will it be in the Financial District? After Bay-Adelaide East, 100 Adelaide and INDX Condos, the whole district is already fully built out.

destruction

Ramako · #63 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 1:29 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vertigo3000

destruction

Something pretty large would have to come down.

Innsertnamehere · #64 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 2:32 AM**

there are 2 lowrise buildings right beside fcp that could be torn down. one of them is 3 floors, the other around 10. they are right beside each other, and (IMO) are prime redevelopment locations.

Ramako · #65 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:38 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

there are 2 lowrise buildings right beside fcp that could be torn down. one of them is 3 floors, the other around 10. they are right beside each other, and (IMO) are prime redevelopment locations.

It's been said that if FCP were proposed today in the exact same location and at the exact same size, it would be rejected because of shadows being cast on NPS. The buildings you are referring to are north of FCP meaning that a supertall there would cast serious shadows on NPS, so there's no way a supertall is happening on those sites.

blacktrojan3921 · #66 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:48 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramako

How will it be in the Financial District? After Bay-Adelaide East, 100 Adelaide and INDX Condos, the whole district is already fully built out.

I imagine that either something will be demolished, or there are plans in the city council to have the district boundries expanded upon.

Ramako · #67 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:59 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by blacktrojan3921

I imagine that either something will be demolished, or there are plans in the city council to have the district boundries expanded upon.

There is a plan going before council next month to restrict buildings heights in downtown Toronto and it makes no mention of expanding the financial district, though it does note that height will be unlimited in the district so long as no shadows are cast on NPS.

DrNest · #68 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:34 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Ramako

There is a plan going before council next month to restrict buildings heights in downtown Toronto and it makes no mention of expanding the financial district, though it does note that height will be unlimited in the district so long as no shadows are cast on NPS.

Maybe I'm reading that incorrectly, but you state the plan says building heights will be restricted, but also that height is unlimited so long as it does not cast shadows on NPS. How does that work? Is that not contradictory? If anything, I would prefer the latter restriction of these two.

With regards to potential location of supertalls in Toronto, yes I would agree demolition would be required in the financial district. However, I would also imagine that along Queen's Quay would be a good site.
In terms of space to build, the plot of land at the waterfront between Parliament and Cherry St would be great other than access by public transport. It is close to entrances/exits for the Gardiner and DVP, but is a fair trek from Union Station. Perhaps if a number of skyscrapers were to go up in this area, an addition GO station could be built on the tracks north of the Gardiner, east of Cherry St.

I appreciate this is just postulation, and seeing the issues Toronto is having just getting a subway built, funding wouldn't be easy to come by. But it's an idea I'm throwing out for discussion.

Ramako · #69 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by DrNest

Maybe I'm reading that incorrectly, but you state the plan says building heights will be restricted, but also that height is unlimited so long as it does not cast shadows on NPS. How does that work? Is that not contradictory? If anything, I would prefer the latter restriction of these two.

The plan covers the entire downtown area (from Front to Bloor). The Financial District is just one part of the downtown. The plan shows that within that district heights will be unlimited, but in other parts of the downtown that are outside of that district heights will be limited to certain ranges.

Scroll to page 69: http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2...file-44938.pdf

DrNest · #70 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:50 PM**

Ok thanks, that makes more sense.

yaletown_fella · #71 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 3:58 PM**

That would be horrible if it came to fruition. Do you really want to maintain the centralized pyramid skyline? uggh

niwell · #72 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 4:10 PM**

Keep in mind guidelines are just that. This is something that is meant to be taken into consideration for new projects, but is by no means legally binding. Even if translated down into policy in the OP review and new zoning by-laws (which is unlikely) it's very common to amend these on a contextual site-specific basis.

It's understandable that people on this site focus only on the supposed height caps, but the guidelines are really more about placing a higher standard on design and street treatment.

yaletown_fella · #73 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 5:34 PM**

^^ Thanks for clarifying!
I'm too lazy to read the giant 100 page pdf.

A revision (more like introduction) of design and streetscaping guidelines make a lot of sense in the downtown, especially considering the insane pace at which it's approaching full build out.

haljackey · #74 Posted **Feb 10, 2012, 10:39 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by osmo

I have word from a good source that there is indeed a firm plan for a building in the Financial District that will "surpass FCP". this firm has 2 projects in the works one will be Canada's first LEED Platinum Skyscraper, the other will be Toronto and Canada's first Supertall.

Either this is awesome news or someone is trolling us hardcore.

taal · #75 Posted **Feb 11, 2012, 12:16 AM**

I'm putting my money on trolling ...

Gresto · #76 Posted **Feb 11, 2012, 4:18 AM**

XXX trolling.

caltrane74 · #77 Posted **Feb 12, 2012, 12:00 PM**

Has got to be 45 Bay Street....

No other place it could be.

Andrewjm3D · #78 Posted **Feb 12, 2012, 5:30 PM**

What about BCE Place 3? There is a large lot at Richmond and Victoria, and that massive lot behind the Toronto Star building. I remember hearing a while back something was in the works for that lot and also the location of the conference centre at the Harbour Castle.

Dylan Leblanc · #79 Posted **Feb 12, 2012, 7:14 PM**

I don't know what the rules or boundaries for the Financial District are, but I think a neat place for a supertall would be the block containing three junior highrises from the 60s and 70s at the SE corner of University and Adelaide, kitty corner to Shangri-la. Take out the three buildings here (tallest is 18 storys) and there's a great spot for a supertall. Right here - http://www.google.com/maps?ll=43.648...a,+Canada&z=19

Or heck, rip down that stupid Citygroup Place building at the foot of University and put up something scary tall!

urbandreamer · #80 Posted **Feb 13, 2012, 4:48 PM**

I believe Osmo is hinting at the rumoured Oxford Properties monster coming to the MINT area. After all, Canada's first LEED Platinum skyscraper will be Oxford's 100 Adelaide St W http://www.oxfordbigblocks.com/build...g=100-adelaide

Iirc, an existing 10-20s building is coming down.