Toronto E18HTEEN Erskine | 106.98m | 35s | KG | Kirkor Architects

Let's be honest, demand for 3 bedrooms is small, which is the only reason not many of them are being built. At Y/E, at 550/sf, a 1200sf three bedroom will cost $660K, plus $40-50K for a parking spot; assuming $0.5/sf condo fee, monthly condo fee is a whopping $600 a month, to be escalated 3-5% a year. Let's ask ourselves, how many of us here are willing to buy these units, instead of a $700k nice single family house with no fees a bit farther away from the core?

I wonder about this argument. I think that Millennials want to stay in the core. They are willing to give up backyards and garages and whatever, even when they raise families. They are used to life without cars. They walk and they bike. They want walkability to amenities. These are the ideals with which they grew up. These are not people who live in 400 sf boxes in City Place and then want to give up city life for commuting just so they can have badly-built "nice single family homes with no fees." They are used to highrise life. They are used to compact living. They may not want to garden and shovel. They are happy with parks. They are paying $900K-plus for sh-tboxes in Riverdale that needs lots more in maintenance than in monthly condo fees. So I am confident that, if you build them decent family-sized and well-located condos, they will come.

But this received wisdom that there is no demand is self-fulfilling because, if it ain't available, there is no demand. Has anybody actually surveyed, done any research?

On another note, serious thread drift here.

This Erskine project is bad news all round, as it is being proposed with a podium hard up against the oldest school in the TDSB, John Fisher Public School. Not only does that pose risk to kids during the construction phase -- big trucks anybody? -- it will permanently shade their grounds and turn the place into dog poop central for the condo residents with dogs.
 
Last edited:
I don't think this project is CityLights; there is already another thread for it http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showthread.php/18685

Erskine.jpg
 

Attachments

  • Erskine.jpg
    Erskine.jpg
    2.2 MB · Views: 1,407
It's now only 32 stories (and MPH)
 
New renderings from the Dev App site. The building is now 35 storeys, and it looks like the project has been taken over by KG Group. Architect is Kirkor.
upload_2016-12-13_11-12-19.png
upload_2016-12-13_11-13-37.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2016-12-13_11-12-19.png
    upload_2016-12-13_11-12-19.png
    405.3 KB · Views: 779
  • upload_2016-12-13_11-13-37.png
    upload_2016-12-13_11-13-37.png
    444 KB · Views: 699
It is so unfortunate that a 35 storey building is set to rise besides a primary school. I see the designs and the balconies are 10 metres away from the school backyard.... should that be allowed? Let's say something flies of the balcony.... where does it go? On the 6 year old head?
 
San Francisco is another example where supply of housing has been restricted, resulting in very unaffordable prices. On the other hand, cities like Chicago have been pro-development, which has kept housing price quite affordable (no it is not because Chicago is less desirable, it has a massive population).




Than you for some sober thought. SF has serious problem that is not going away anytime soon.
 
San Francisco is another example where supply of housing has been restricted, resulting in very unaffordable prices. On the other hand, cities like Chicago have been pro-development, which has kept housing price quite affordable (no it is not because Chicago is less desirable, it has a massive population).

San Francisco is surrounded by water on three sides limiting the amount of room for development. Chicago can sprawl all the way to Kansas City if it wants.
 
More renders from the Dev App site:
upload_2017-2-17_19-13-37.png
upload_2017-2-17_19-13-59.png


upload_2017-2-17_19-14-35.png
upload_2017-2-17_19-15-3.png


upload_2017-2-17_19-15-26.png
upload_2017-2-17_19-15-51.png
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-2-17_19-13-37.png
    upload_2017-2-17_19-13-37.png
    363.4 KB · Views: 841
  • upload_2017-2-17_19-13-59.png
    upload_2017-2-17_19-13-59.png
    333.6 KB · Views: 670
  • upload_2017-2-17_19-14-35.png
    upload_2017-2-17_19-14-35.png
    343.2 KB · Views: 903
  • upload_2017-2-17_19-15-3.png
    upload_2017-2-17_19-15-3.png
    366.3 KB · Views: 716
  • upload_2017-2-17_19-15-26.png
    upload_2017-2-17_19-15-26.png
    330.6 KB · Views: 833
  • upload_2017-2-17_19-15-51.png
    upload_2017-2-17_19-15-51.png
    403.6 KB · Views: 741

Back
Top