News   Apr 24, 2024
Sustainability Month: Mass Timber Construction Showing Long-Term Economic Benefits
 143     0 
News   Apr 24, 2024
Aspen Ridge Freehold Townhomes at Crosstown in Master-Planned Community
 418     0 
News   Apr 24, 2024
News Roundup for April 24, 2024
 451     0 

Dwell City Towns (427 & Rathburn, Menkes, ?s, ?) (was Sell-Off Condos)

Holiday Towers

Not GREAT architecture, but not bad. Good location, when one considers its proximity to the city centre. And what, one bus ride to the subway? So, this development will indeed assist people to get into the market. The intensification of the mid suburbs...one has to appreciate this aspect.
 
Alvar said:
Not GREAT architecture, but not bad. Good location, when one considers its proximity to the city centre. And what, one bus ride to the subway? So, this development will indeed assist people to get into the market. The intensification of the mid suburbs...one has to appreciate this aspect.
Click to expand...

Everywhere in Toronto has a one-bus ride to the subway (or SRT).

I think this is good for the area. I'm just saying to get to the places that are supposedly so close (apart from perhaps the Galati and, stretching it, Cloverdale), it's a pain to get to without the car.
 
here's a photo posted by Jasonzed over at SSC...

HPIM1240.jpg
 
Typical schlock that passes as acceptable in the burbs. Developers don't even have to try out there, do they? Look how fat those things look. 15 to 20 more storeys each would have been nice, especially since they're right next to the 427, so there shouldn't be any NIMBY factor. Oh well, it's still an improvement over what's there now, which seems to have become a common phrase regarding mediocre developments in Toronto.
 
Towered said:
Typical schlock that passes as acceptable in the burbs. Developers don't even have to try out there, do they? Look how fat those things look. 15 to 20 more storeys each would have been nice, especially since they're right next to the 427, so there shouldn't be any NIMBY factor.
Click to expand...

Well there might have been a NIMBY factor, and there may have been political issues as well - not every developer wants to go through a lengthy and costly fight with the city or the OMB to gain extra density in an area that hasn't seen much development in the past several years. FRAM is certainly taking a risk by going into an area with an affordable ownership type of development (the psf will be much lower then most other developments under discussion at UT) which is on quite frankly a 'B' or 'C' site where there would be a lot of questions regarding market demand to absorb such a large project.

Developers have to try everywhere, the real estate market is littered with failed companies that didn't try hard enough or gave it everything they had, but still couldn't compete.
 
The buildings are plenty tall enough and in fact, would say they are too tall. I can't say I'm a fan of Ontario's planning with highrises dropped whimsically on the suburban landscape. I don't get the whole too fat arguement either. However, I can agree with the design coming from some faded, ripped, creased and possibly sticky catalog from the depths of some long erased MS Paint filled floppy
 
maestro said:
The buildings are plenty tall enough and in fact, would say they are too tall.
Click to expand...

Though given the 427-corridor location, they're "in scale". Now, if they were on the west side of the West Mall, I *would* agree with you...
 
maestro said:
The buildings are plenty tall enough and in fact, would say they are too tall. I can't say I'm a fan of Ontario's planning with highrises dropped whimsically on the suburban landscape.
Click to expand...

Care to supply a few examples...


(Not including the Riverdale by Ganjavih Developments)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top