Toronto 149 College Street | 205.4m | 60s | Northwest Development | Sweeny &Co

[Northern Light]

This one has reached the AIC.

Height: 60 storeys

Architect: Sweeny

The link: https://www.toronto.ca/city-governm...nt/application-details/?id=5513712&pid=218186

@Paclo

Notable, beyond the obvious: 840m2 floor plate, well above typical

Elevators (for residential section) Six elevators to 705 residential units ( one elevator per 117.5 units)

480 Units targeted as student housing - no specific institutional partner yet identified.

Given the above, and location and scale, @HousingNowTO is flagged.

I have thoughts...... but they will wait.

 

[neuhaus]

Besides the 1-bedroom units, all of the other unit types looks to be extremely generous in size:
1-bedroom avg. unit size: 516 sq.ft.
2-bedroom avg. unit size: 1,658 sq.ft.
3-bedroom avg. unit size: 2,056 sq.ft.
Private student residence avg. unit size: 1,292 sq.ft. (this might be for a multi-bedroom unit apartment setup, but I’m not sure)

 

[Northern Light]

Besides the 1-bedroom units, all of the other unit types looks to be extremely generous in size:
1-bedroom avg. unit size: 516 sq.ft.
2-bedroom avg. unit size: 1,658 sq.ft.
3-bedroom avg. unit size: 2,056 sq.ft.
Private student residence avg. unit size: 1,292 sq.ft. (this might be for a multi-bedroom unit apartment setup, but I’m not sure)

Student Residence Floior:

Those larger units would almost certainly be multiple bedroom scenarios.

 

[HousingNowTO]

...adding to our STUDENT HOUSING watch-list...

Student housing shortage is a 'crisis' that should worry all Canadians: Desjardins

The shortage of affordable and adequate student housing in Canada isn't just a pressing issue to those renting them, a report said. Read on.

financialpost.com

 

[Koops65]

 

[Doppleganger]

I understand the need for student housing downtown is critical, but it makes me sick that any portion of this lovely building should be demolished. Yes, its interior has been altered significantly over the years, but it remains one of Lennox's finest surviving examples of the Richardsonian Romanesque style. Are there no buildings in this city that we are willing to say 'hands-off' to developers? After nearly losing Old City Hall(another Lennox building) to a dystopian version of the Eaton Centre in the early 1970s, you'd have thought perhaps we'd learned our lesson. Surely there must be some buildings in this city that we deem worthy of preserving in their entirety?

 

[torontologist]

I understand the need for student housing downtown is critical, but it makes me sick that any portion of this lovely building should be demolished. Yes, its interior has been altered significantly over the years, but it remains one of Lennox's finest surviving examples of the Richardsonian Romanesque style. Are there no buildings in this city that we are willing to say 'hands-off' to developers? After nearly losing Old City Hall(another Lennox building) to a dystopian version of the Eaton Centre in the early 1970s, you'd have thought perhaps we'd learned our lesson. Surely there must be some buildings in this city that we deem worthy of preserving in their entirety?

Unfortunately as long as large swathes of nearby unremarkable Victorian houses, also largely altered, are protected from redevelopment, this will continue to happen. Most significant heritage buildings are located in the few areas where the City allows tall buildings to get built, so this is going to happen over and over and over.

This should be built in the Annex, Chinatown or Grange Park, but Toronto City Council has abused the heritage protection/zoning system to please change-resistant cranks and here we are.

 

[ProjectEnd]

Unfortunately as long as large swathes of nearby unremarkable Victorian houses, also largely altered, are protected from redevelopment, this will continue to happen. Most significant heritage buildings are located in the few areas where the City allows tall buildings to get built, so this is going to happen over and over and over.

This should be built in the Annex, Chinatown or Grange Park, but Toronto City Council has abused the heritage protection/zoning system to please change-resistant cranks and here we are.

Well said. This proposal is a shambling disgrace.

 

[Northern Light]

Unfortunately as long as large swathes of nearby unremarkable Victorian houses, also largely altered, are protected from redevelopment, this will continue to happen.

I'm going to be contrarian here.......... I see value in preserving what I think is one of the most desirable aspects of Toronto, tree-lined, Victorian-styled, human-scaled side streets.

I certainly wouldn't mind if a few of those were converted to apartments inside (legally); or if a few select streets of them went commercial. But the idea that the only way to save a few excellent buildings such as this one is to agree to a wholesale demolition of The Annex doesn't sit right with me.

I see no reason we can't do both.

Most significant heritage buildings are located in the few areas where the City allows tall buildings to get built, so this is going to happen over and over and over.

Again, we need to state first, that it is a choice to grow our population, not some unavoidable feat of nature. With birth rates well below replacement, if we slowed the runaway train of newcomers, we could actually see housing prices fall, rent fall, homelessness alleviated and pressure to wipe out heritage buildings subside.

That to one side, there is ample room to replace strip plazas and non-descript bungalows throughout the City with new development.

This should be built in the Annex, Chinatown or Grange Park

Let me try a different take............ this just shouldn't be built............anywhere.

If we scale back non-domestic students in numbers, there will be no student housing crisis. We also already have a proposed new residence on U of T's campus that is not under construction; and TMU/Ryerson still has a potential residence site sitting empty.

, but Toronto City Council has abused the heritage protection/zoning system to please change-resistant cranks and here we are.

Yes, the City has wrongly designated some buildings, but that plays little role in this outcome.

 

[Doppleganger]

Unfortunately as long as large swathes of nearby unremarkable Victorian houses, also largely altered, are protected from redevelopment, this will continue to happen. Most significant heritage buildings are located in the few areas where the City allows tall buildings to get built, so this is going to happen over and over and over.

This should be built in the Annex, Chinatown or Grange Park, but Toronto City Council has abused the heritage protection/zoning system to please change-resistant cranks and here we a

Unfortunately as long as large swathes of nearby unremarkable Victorian houses, also largely altered, are protected from redevelopment, this will continue to happen. Most significant heritage buildings are located in the few areas where the City allows tall buildings to get built, so this is going to happen over and over and over.

This should be built in the Annex, Chinatown or Grange Park, but Toronto City Council has abused the heritage protection/zoning system to please change-resistant cranks and here we are.

I certainly don't pretend to know the ins and outs of how the city determines where highrises can or cannot be built in the downtown core, but it would seem reasonable to me that if someone chooses to live anywhere downtown, be it the Annex, Chinatown or any other neighbourhood, they should, within reason, expect highrise developments on their doorstep. But I would also expect that those neighbourhood's buildings best representative of our past, relevant to our history or of a particular architectural style or school are also given their due respect and preserved in their entirety.

 

[maestro]

The is a class A heritage property on just about any list. This is a disgrace.

First. This is probably no more than a valuation play. I doubt there is any intent to build. I don't think Dubai has a 200 metre student accommodation. Second, the pressing need for student housing and a cause of the affordability crisis is the commodization of our post secondary institutions to the benefit of only those post secondary institutions. The threshold for Canadian student entrance is stratospheric compared to 30 years ago. It's much harder to get in to a globally recognised local school. Third, it's preposterous to infer much of Toronto is undevelopable when there are actual cities in which the majority is undevelopable. Fourth, there's a rationale behind these districts. It's either unaware to the monster home, stucco addition building crave or having a family home with a yard being elitist which is too socialist democratic for me in part to what counts as a brand new family dwelling nowadays

As little as 25 years ago, Toronto managed with a handful of 40 storey residential towers. I cannot believe things have changed that much and in that short of a period that high rises and I'm assuming closer to 120 metres than 45 metres need to be everywhere. Unless, you're a supporter of 35 million people by 2100.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

What's bothersome here is that they are planning on losing some of detailing that makes the heritage building unique here if the renders are to be believed. To which is likely a VE approach to save on restoration costs. And if they're thinking like that, then it doesn't bold well for the rest of the tower proposed here either, to put it mildly...

...also see: "Design" Haus. >.<

 

[Lenser]

Put me down as a huge fan of alleged "unremarkable" Victorian housing. I guarantee that, should they be eradicated, multitudes of Torontonians will bemoan the relative paucity of historical examples in the city's building range of typologies.

It's not a spartan, either/or equation. There's plenty of room for a lot of variation in building height, scale, cladding materials, etc. You don't have to knock down every two story building because it's supposedly in the way of some vague notion of "progress."

 

[ProjectEnd]

The is a class A heritage property on just about any list. This is a disgrace.

First. This is probably no more than a valuation play. I doubt there is any intent to build. I don't think Dubai has a 200 metre student accommodation. Second, the pressing need for student housing and a cause of the affordability crisis is the commodization of our post secondary institutions to the benefit of only those post secondary institutions. The threshold for Canadian student entrance is stratospheric compared to 30 years ago. It's much harder to get in to a globally recognised local school. Third, it's preposterous to infer much of Toronto is undevelopable when there are actual cities in which the majority is undevelopable. Fourth, there's a rationale behind these districts. It's either unaware to the monster home, stucco addition building crave or having a family home with a yard being elitist which is too socialist democratic for me in part to what counts as a brand new family dwelling nowadays

As little as 25 years ago, Toronto managed with a handful of 40 storey residential towers. I cannot believe things have changed that much and in that short of a period that high rises and I'm assuming closer to 120 metres than 45 metres need to be everywhere. Unless, you're a supporter of 35 million people by 2100.

Northwest and Dermot have been working on this for years. and it's only gotten bigger with time. I agree, it's not anything to get worried about in the near-term, but I do worry about this (and other) building's future(s) if nothing in the City is considered sacred (and trust me, in development circles, nothing in this City is considered sacred...).

Put me down as a huge fan of alleged "unremarkable" Victorian housing. I guarantee that, should they be eradicated, multitudes of Torontonians will bemoan the relative paucity of historical examples in the city's building range of typologies.

It's not a spartan, either/or equation. There's plenty of room for a lot of variation in building height, scale, cladding materials, etc. You don't have to knock down every two story building because it's supposedly in the way of some vague notion of "progress."

Mixed agreement. While I certainly don't advocate wholesale destruction as some may, there's a ton of unremarkable, wood frame, bust-down houses in almost every block from King to Keele to Eglinton to the DVP. To say it's all worthless is just as silly as the current decree: that it's all essentially untouchable.

 

[FastidiousHack]

The is a class A heritage property on just about any list. This is a disgrace.

Entirely agree.

Now re: zoning/heritage:

Toronto City Council has abused the heritage protection/zoning system to please change-resistant cranks and here we are.

You don't have to knock down every two story building because it's supposedly in the way of some vague notion of "progress."

While I certainly don't advocate wholesale destruction as some may, there's a ton of unremarkable, wood frame, bust-down houses in almost every block from King to Keele to Eglinton to the DVP. To say it's all worthless is just as silly as the current decree: that it's all essentially untouchable.

With birth rates well below replacement, if we slowed the runaway train of newcomers, we could actually see housing prices fall, rent fall, homelessness alleviated and pressure to wipe out heritage buildings subside.

We can blame our housing crisis on immigration and zoning, and that's not entirely incorrect, it's not the root reason we're in this mess.

The primary cause is the financialization of shelter in Canada.

Home price growth has outpaced the S&P500 by more than double for the last decade and a half straight. As a reminder, the bank will not give you a loan to invest in the stock market. However, for 5% down, they'll loan you another $800k to buy your 10th rental property - and for the last 15 years, they'd do for less than 2% interest. The volume of people doing this has increased housing prices - 40% of all homes in Ontario are owned by multi-property owners. It's morally wrong, and unsustainable for economic growth, but institutionally encouraged and protected.

You can (and should) change immigration numbers, heritage protections, and zoning laws, but it won't make a difference until the market economics of real-estate investment change.