Toronto Bungalow on Mercer | 62.79m | 17s | Kalovida | Scott Shields

Looks great but I think it would be even more impressive if it just had another 10 stories, it would look so much taller than it actually would be!
 
2r6obwh.png
 
There's not going to be a building built right next to it for a long, long time.
 
17 floors + MPH per the latest site plan application submission last month.
Architectural plans are on the City site.
 
Beautiful. I would love to see more developers take this kind of approach. Even on larger sites you could get structures like this (ok, maybe a bit wider for efficiency's sake) if developers/architects were just a little more creative. The Honest Ed's proposal is a great example of what I mean. A monotonous, block-long facade is worse for the streetscape than a streetwall that is a little too tall--if only our planners could see that!

Can't wait to see this built!
 
TDotTeen said:
Beautiful. I would love to see more developers take this kind of approach. Even on larger sites you could get structures like this (ok, maybe a bit wider for efficiency's sake) if developers/architects were just a little more creative. The Honest Ed's proposal is a great example of what I mean. A monotonous, block-long facade is worse for the streetscape than a streetwall that is a little too tall--if only our planners could see that!

Can't wait to see this built!
Click to expand...

Don't hold your breath. Builders are trying to maximize profits. They will build the biggest property possible with as many units they can cram in them as possible. They're built for investors.

That said, you're right, I wish we could see smaller scale, interesting infill projects like this one. IMO, projects like this is what gives the city character.
 
It's going to be expensive. Let's see if it get built.


The 5th floor space is nuts. It's divided into two.
 
TDotTeen said:
Beautiful. I would love to see more developers take this kind of approach. Even on larger sites you could get structures like this (ok, maybe a bit wider for efficiency's sake) if developers/architects were just a little more creative. The Honest Ed's proposal is a great example of what I mean. A monotonous, block-long facade is worse for the streetscape than a streetwall that is a little too tall--if only our planners could see that!

Can't wait to see this built!
Click to expand...

Absolutely agreed. I'm hoping this fine-grained approach using smaller parcels of land is something that will become more common in the future. That seems to be the case in most large cities so there's hope.
 
Unlikely. The costs are simply too high to be more than a niche building. It barely makes sense at the highest end of the market. The only cities I can think of that are more consistent at pulling off these 1000 to under 2000 square foot plate building are extremely expensive like New York and Vancouver. 500 Wellington and Museum House were priced accordingly.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top