[milkycontent]

With the school staying where it is, it's going to be very annoying for people living in the 40s tower to walk ~500m all the way around to the school to get the to the UPX station that is only about 100m away from their building. Maybe a zipline from the roof?

 

[rdaner]

Maybe I jumped the gun: maybe utilities?

 

[Towered]

The proponents tried *really* hard make the school work, but those groups are just interminably difficult to work with.

It worked at Bloor and Dufferin - why not here?

 

[ADRM]

It worked at Bloor and Dufferin - why not here?

Only the school boards, in their infinite wisdom, know the answer.

In fairness, the new Toronto Lands Corp. CEO is fantastic and understands the folly of the status quo, so here's hoping he can be a reformer.

 

[Amare]

It worked at Bloor and Dufferin - why not here?

Last I heard, it was the TCDSB who are being the twats here as they are leasing the space from the TDSB, and they dont want to move. Unfortunately, there's nothing in their lease that could force them out either. With Bloor and Dufferin, that school wasnt being leased out, and thus didnt have to deal with another school board. It did still move through the land disposition process, but there was one less obstacle in the way (ie: no TCDSB) so it was easier to go through the land disposition.

And knowing how things like this typically work, the TCDSB wil probably come out in 5-10 years and say "oh we no longer have a need to lease your space, we're building a new school at X location". By that time, the ship will have sailed on this location and this will be a squandered opportunity all because the TCDSB doesn't want to play ball.

 

[Simeon]

Why couldn't the heights of these buildings be higher? Shouldn't this be considered a TOC?

 

[max]

Why couldn't the heights of these buildings be higher? Shouldn't this be considered a TOC?

Would be nice if they could build a bridge over the rail corridor to connect to the railpath in exchange for more height. I suspect that's not possible now due to the provincial governments changes to section 37.

 

[goodcitywhenfinished]

This is definitely better than the first two iterations but only if they keep those podiums bricked up.

 

[Northern Light]

Why couldn't the heights of these buildings be higher? Shouldn't this be considered a TOC?

Only in Toronto..... ..... I mean seriously.......only in Toronto do people look at a dense proposal of buildings up to 40s in height and ask...... 'why so short?' LOL

In all seriousness, the shorter buildings generally reflect the need to minimize shadows on the school yard and the proposed park. This is most overt with the 4s building on the south side of the site, directly opposite the proposed park, which is also limited by transition to low rise residential beyond.

The heights west of the park and the massing are influenced by shadowing considerations.

 

[Collingwoodbuildinglover]

Hey in Collingwood they basically have a rule that it can't be a certain height over the tree canopy so the more I'm on here the more I realize it's not all about the height it very much is about the design for location

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

I don't.

No pedestrian bridge is contemplated here so far I'm aware.

...so what does it take to get their fingers out and put one there? It doesn't have to be fancy or elaborate...just nice, easy and practical.

 

[Towered]

...so what does it take to get their fingers out and put one there? It doesn't have to be fancy or elaborate...just nice, easy and practical.

Make it a requirement to gain approval.

 

[Hamiltonian]

Can we get Doug Ford to step in and force a land swap. Unless it's a mixed-use school like North Toronto Collegiate, a school at a major urban intersection makes no sense.

 

[guavadelic]

Last I heard, it was the TCDSB who are being the twats here as they are leasing the space from the TDSB, and they dont want to move. Unfortunately, there's nothing in their lease that could force them out either. With Bloor and Dufferin, that school wasnt being leased out, and thus didnt have to deal with another school board. It did still move through the land disposition process, but there was one less obstacle in the way (ie: no TCDSB) so it was easier to go through the land disposition.

And knowing how things like this typically work, the TCDSB wil probably come out in 5-10 years and say "oh we no longer have a need to lease your space, we're building a new school at X location". By that time, the ship will have sailed on this location and this will be a squandered opportunity all because the TCDSB doesn't want to play ball.

Moving is never easy but why do they seem against swapping out a nearly 60 year-old building for a brand new one involving just a slight relocation?

 

[Towered]

Make it a requirement to gain approval.

Also, are there any mechanisms in place that the city could use to pressure the TDCSB to play ball here?