Okay, but the Scotia tower only takes up a fairly small fraction of the entire block it is on, not to mention that Scotia has a much larger floorplate than those of the towers proposed for the 1/7 Yonge site.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
Because they plan to fit 7 towers on a smaller than the block Scotiaplaza is on (6.4 acres vs 6.9), It is just insane. The towers are simply too close.. they should be going for more height with less towers if they really want to achieve this kind of density on this site.
Click to expand...

That's not an explanation, you've simply restated your grievance. Why is it 'insane?' Why are they 'too close?' Who is losing what here?
 
they are losing any feeling of light, and space. The majority of peoples views from these condos will be other peoples condos 50 feet away.. just way too little space left between the structures. This site is appropriate for high density, but not this level of it. (for the 4150 units alone, they are planning a density of 308,000 people per square km (assuming 8000 people will be living in the complex) , without counting the additional people who will be working in the office buildings)
 
If you think that's dense take a look at the Marina District in Dubai;
Dubai+(177).JPG

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1183927&page=3

334441836.jpg

http://cdn-wac.emirates247.com/polopoly_fs/1.475239.1347450719!/image/334441836.jpg

398987520.jpg

http://www.emirates247.com/news/emi...es-lowest-service-charges-2012-09-13-1.475304

Which includes;
Princess 1358ft(worlds tallest residential building)
Elite 1247ft
Torch 1105ft
Ocean Heights 1017ft
Emirates Crown 971ft
Sulafa 935ft
Marina Pinnacle 919ft
Emirates Marina 845ft
Le Reve 689ft
Marina Crown 679ft

plus u/c or on hold;
Pentominium 1693ft
Marina 101 1417ft
Damac 1099ft

250m min map;
http://skyscraperpage.com/cities/maps/?cityID=23&lat=25.0886402311&lng=55.1472365856&z=17&height=54
 
I think this project is more comparable to the Sorrento in Hong Kong;

flickr-2215624837-image.jpg

Sorrento 1 841 ft, Sorrento 2 774 ft, Sorrento 3 715 ft, Sorrento 5 696 ft, Sorrento 6 676 ft.
 
^^ Dubai is ridiculous. Why build these towers so close to each other when they have(had) so much space?

Spread them out a little. Make them more liveable.
 
Marina District has to be the ugliest assembly of skyscrapers in the world. Sorrento isn't that far behind, though Union Square (minus ICC & Cullinan) are basically generic-HK highrises on steroids.
 
The separation of the towers doesn't look particularly out of line in comparison to other projects in the area, save the one immediately north of the Toronto Star building.

AoD
 
Thanks for posting the notice. I walked over and took a look as well. Gives us a better sense of the massing. Btw, the separation between the towers is marked 25m and 36m. I think 25m is quite close, not sure I'd buy a unit that close to my neighbour.

I was hoping the tallest bldg would be at QQ and not at the NW end of the site.

4150 units/perhaps 8000 people. 8 Levels of cars. Anyone know how many cars?

10 Yonge, 16 Yonge and 18 Yonge each have about 400 units so perhaps 800 people each. The absolute size of 1&7 Yonge developement is easily 3x of the immediate neighbours across the street. Wondering if 10Y,16Y,18Y developments ever had the option to propose 80 storeys instead of 40. Or maybe the market decided 40 would work and not 80 back 8-10 years ago. Anyone know?
 
Big Daddy said:
^^ Dubai is ridiculous. Why build these towers so close to each other when they have(had) so much space?

Spread them out a little. Make them more liveable.
Click to expand...

Have you been to the UAE? I have. Do you know how hot it gets there? I do. I'm thinking people appreciate the shade.
 
Did another pixel count using the clearer image using 272m as the height to the start of the roof element, came up with a height to the top of the roof of the tallest building of 295m.

The other roof heights of the new buildings, from tallest to shortest, are 268m, 262m, 247m, 230m and 184m (plus the Toronto Star building at 138m).

The heights are likely to be off by one or two meters due to photographic distortion, but they must be close to those numbers.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top