Solaris
Senior Member
wow ... resurgence of rental buildings continues
Toronto Station Place | 134.72m | 40s | First Capital | Diamond Schmitt
- Thread starter coolxten
- Start date
Edllguy
Active Member
"this site will be new rental apartment buildings. no sales".
Does this mean then that the shovel will be in ground very soon and built quicker?
Does this mean then that the shovel will be in ground very soon and built quicker?
Last edited:
ProjectEnd
Superstar
modernizt
Senior Member
Check out the beautiful window-wall spandrel cladding all up and down the tower. Blech.
mrezwayz
UT Member
i liked original better than the revised design... it had more character over this dull look. go back main and main.
Kenojuak
Active Member
Original design was more interesting and unique, but likely would have been very expensive to build. Custom formwork and elevation work at every storey. The architect and developer should have known better than to show that design which realistically never would have been built. This is not a downtown luxury building where you can afford indulgent construction methods and materials. There is a huge pipeline of units coming through in this Kipling-Islington area, so rents will be extremely competitive and margins tight. Rationalizing the tower construction system probably reduced the cost considerably.
They could have accomplished the earlier exterior design without special formwork, but it would have required either custom precast panelling and/or custom curtain/window wall… so yes, it would have been more expensive!
As this is not the first time that custom randomized exterior designs have been presented at the Zoning Bylaw Amendment (ZBA) stage only to be replaced by less expensive exteriors—which are essentially devoid of expression—at the Site Plan Approval (SPA) stage, the question becomes "are the developers presenting a remarkable design at the ZBA stage trying to influence its density and height approvals, only to swap that out when the building envelop approvals follow"?
If you asked that of some councillors downtown, the answer would be "yes", otherwise there would be no provision for The One right now that requires the same exterior expression presented at the ZBA stage be retained for the SPA to be approved later. Personally, I don't doubt the aim to preserve the design at The One, but maybe it's time that we either require the same of other buildings, so that there's no bait and switch when it comes to SPA.
42
As this is not the first time that custom randomized exterior designs have been presented at the Zoning Bylaw Amendment (ZBA) stage only to be replaced by less expensive exteriors—which are essentially devoid of expression—at the Site Plan Approval (SPA) stage, the question becomes "are the developers presenting a remarkable design at the ZBA stage trying to influence its density and height approvals, only to swap that out when the building envelop approvals follow"?
If you asked that of some councillors downtown, the answer would be "yes", otherwise there would be no provision for The One right now that requires the same exterior expression presented at the ZBA stage be retained for the SPA to be approved later. Personally, I don't doubt the aim to preserve the design at The One, but maybe it's time that we either require the same of other buildings, so that there's no bait and switch when it comes to SPA.
42
mrezwayz
UT Member
has this project been approved? ETA on construction? they have already closed all small businesses... thought construction to start soon.
PMT
Senior Member
stjames2queenwest
Senior Member
It's been there for a month or more now. No demolition yet?
PMT
Senior Member
Nope. The buildings are still intact, and I couldn't find any application for a demo permit.
maestro
Senior Member
The margins on rental towers have been extremely thin for decades. It's still not worth it to build them base on their performance. If it was, it does make sense to put more effort into design considering the length of time for the investment to pay out . Alas, Main and Main, etc. isn't building this for themselves. These are built for investors that buy buildings rather than individual condo units with the expectation property value will continue to rise so they can sell it down the road to the next investor for more profit than they would ever net on the rental income.
Edllguy
Active Member
All the approvals for this project is in place. Why all the delays in starting construction?
It's only a delay if a date has been announced and then not met. They haven't said when they'll start yet, unless I missed it.
42
42