Toronto Grid Condos | 157.88m | 50s | CentreCourt | IBI Group

ryguy7787 said:
Or ksun, perhaps it's a mixture between a) the close proximity to two major educational institutions that don't have very much student dorms and b) Currently it's still a semi-sketchy area between street life, hookers and mentally ill people make me worried about tourists turning the wrong corner let alone a child coming home from school.
That being said, the hood is changing quickly and you will see a lot more young couples and families purchasing the many condo's coming to the area over the next decade. Across the city 3 bdm condo's are being swiped up almost immediately by families whether it's because of the price point or it's just convenient for their lifestyle.
Click to expand...

Any condo in downtown is close to at least one or two major education institutions, have you thought about that? We have George Brown, Ryerson, OCAD and UofT, all in relatively small downtown. Tell me one DT location that is not within walking distance to any of them. There is nothing so special about this condo in terms of being close to colleges.

And I don't see what difference it makes in terms safety to families - are you saying those parents who spend tens of thousands to send their teenager kids, half of who are girls, to school don't care about safety, or that "sketchy" streets are more suitable for college streets than to families? It is not like only families consider neigbourhood safety when deciding where to live. We ALL DO. Plus, Dundas/Jarvis really doesn't reserve its bad reputation. I walk by it rather frequently a couple of years ago and while it is run down, there is no real danger.

As to 3 bedroom condos being swiped up by families - maybe true, maybe not, I don't know. I have lived in a condo for the past 5 years with quite some 900sf -1200sf condos, and I don't think there is a single family with kids living in it. Never met one. I hardly see many couples pushing strollers in the core either (except those passing by on streetcars or who are shopping at Eaton Centre). There are, but pretty rare.
 
condovo said:
I saw tons of young families at B.streets a couple days ago. Little kids. Babies. The works.
Click to expand...

considering it is close to the Annex and all those family-friend hoods with a lot of SFH north of Bloor, I am not surprised. Those families you saw most likely don't live in apartment buildings south of Bloor.
 
Rendering
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2015-03-31 at Tuesday Mar 31, 2015 11.35.32 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2015-03-31 at Tuesday Mar 31, 2015 11.35.32 AM.png
    615.6 KB · Views: 830
I'm surpised (and a bit disappointed) that no one has mentioned this article. Yes, it's from NOW, but it's relevant and interesting.

https://nowtoronto.com/news/downtown-east-sides-balancing-act/

I live very close by, but I didn't know that the Shi Sha restaurant (235 Jarvis) between the Tim Horton's and the Grand had a large rooming house behind it. The developer is trying to buy the tenants out to make the development proposal go through easier. It's expected that many of the buyers of the condos will be investors renting to Ryerson students (of course, Ryerson is adding new residence space in the area, on Jarvis Street and on Church).

The neighbourhood is changing very, very quickly.
 
If the glazed areas were actually set back from the precast/clad portions of the west elevation, I'd take it more seriously as a design choice. Unfortunately in its current form it's just an "applique" made to appear like an architectural decision, when in fact it's a way of disguising that the developer just wanted to make every floorplate identical (read: highest possible profit margin) and then hide it behind a zig zag patterned facade.

It's not hard to make a more interesting tower than this, yet many developers remain reluctant to pay for even the most basic architectural "moves".

I'll assume/hope that this is merely an early concept and holds little weight.
 
I was actually talking to the architect about exactly that at the public meeting when I attended, and he essentially stated that it was the developer who didn't want to sacrifice balconies on 5 floors.

The architect isn't dumb, they realize that it would more than likely be much better without those balconies.. But the developer is boss.
Quite frankly, the lack of balconies on 5 floors on each elevation seems like a minor loss for a big improvement in architecture, I'm amazed they aren't willing to take that.
 
innsertnamehere said:
I was actually talking to the architect about exactly that at the public meeting when I attended, and he essentially stated that it was the developer who didn't want to sacrifice balconies on 5 floors.

The architect isn't dumb, they realize that it would more than likely be much better without those balconies.. But the developer is boss.
Quite frankly, the lack of balconies on 5 floors on each elevation seems like a minor loss for a big improvement in architecture, I'm amazed they aren't willing to take that.
Click to expand...

I am not advocating for the simple removal of balconies so much as more pushing and pulling of the floorplates in the east-west axis. The motif suggests the possibility of some really interesting 2-storey units or inset terraces, but instead, it's just that-- a motif/applique over the building.

I never said the architect is dumb, nor am I speaking to their skill or understanding of architecture. I'm speaking to the complete lack of interest in architectonics some local developers have if it means they save some pennies. Unfortunately the architecture field is enslaved much of the time to these types of developers.

That said, IBI seems either disinterested or unskilled in negotiating with developers and advocating for their own designs' architectural integrity, and/or they are brought onboard by developers who already have their projects' parameters firmed up and refuse to negotiate.
 
Last edited:
Sigh.

My biggest problem with Urban Toronto is that people are too busy talking about the latest skyscraper condo's architecture, not caring about the neighbourhood effects.
 
ShonTron said:
Sigh.

My biggest problem with Urban Toronto is that people are too busy talking about the latest skyscraper condo's architecture, not caring about the neighbourhood effects.
Click to expand...

It doesn't go over well when I've tried. People here tend to view gentrification as a universally positive thing without any regard for how it affects the current population of an area, and so there is little room left for discussion, education and debate. Or it is considered off-topic. So I stick to the building at hand.
 
modernizt said:
It doesn't go over well when I've tried. People here tend to view gentrification as a universally positive thing without any regard for how it affects the current population of an area, and so there is little room left for discussion, education and debate. Or it is considered off-topic. So I stick to the building at hand.
Click to expand...

If you do, you always have to be ready to wear the NIMBY label.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top