Toronto PRIME Condos | 148.43m | 46s | CentreCourt | Arcadis

pianiel said:
CenterCourt is heavily investor-oriented. All units are small to lower end price. and cheap finishes.

Though their high turnover rate make the investment less appealing.
I mean they sell fast, build fast and capitalize project fast. It's good for their business, but longer closing is better for investor.
Click to expand...
Hmmm, quality is very comparable to other builders (aka, GG with Mode). You could seriously argue that issue for almost every builder in Ontario. The difference I see is that CenterCourt actually cares about the final outcome of their projects. I wish I owned in their last two projects, and PRIME looks like it will be a standout project.
 
You guys are right, most builders are just like CenterCourt. For investment, I really have no issue with quality.

The only problem I have with CenterCourt is they build too fast...the quick turnover. Other downtown builders need 5 years and they usually finish in 2 years. Investor can gain more value appreciation if closing takes longer.
 
Last edited:
Oh no! The poor investors that have done so much good for the residents of Toronto.
 
Considering builder can't build anything without the fund from investor, and Toronto desperately need new development. Investors indeed do a lot for the city.

New homes essentially are all joint venture between builder and investor.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
It already went to the OMB and the OMB rejected it. It has to be cut in floor count before the OMB approves it

exactly. The board found its shadow impacts and urban design to be generally acceptable, however its height was found to be out of context.
Click to expand...

Which is odd considering that Pace (146m), The Grid (157m), and Dundas Square Gardens (156m) are literally 1 block south of here. I live near Allan Gardens and had been hoping for this kind of density. 36 floors isn't a complete loss but, I suppose, it can always be re-built taller a few generations from now.

I might add that X Condos (161m) is on Jarvis too,. It's 6 blocks north but surely Jarvis is being built as a corridor with tall buildings on it. This could end up being a main downtown street like Yonge except more residential than retail. At some point a major cultural asset (museum) would be nice too. The east side of downtown needs something like that and this is the perfect street for it.
 
Last edited:
isaidso said:
Which is odd considering that Pace (146m), The Grid (157m), and Dundas Square Gardens (156m) are literally 1 block south of here. I live a block north of Allan Gardens and had been hoping for this kind of density. 36 floors isn't a complete loss but it can always be re-built taller a few generations from now.
Click to expand...
The ones at Dundas don't shadow Allan Gardens.

42
 
isaidso said:
Which is odd considering that Pace (146m), The Grid (157m), and Dundas Square Gardens (156m) are literally 1 block south of here. I live near Allan Gardens and had been hoping for this kind of density. 36 floors isn't a complete loss but it can always be re-built taller a few generations from now.

I might add that X Condos (161m) is on Jarvis too,. It's 6 blocks north but surely Jarvis is being built as a corridor with tall buildings on it. This could end up being a main downtown street like Yonge except more residential than retail. At some point a major cultural asset (museum) would be nice too. The east side of downtown needs something like that and this is the perfect street for it.
Click to expand...
interchange42 said:
The ones at Dundas don't shadow Allan Gardens.

42
Click to expand...

If you read the decision the LPAT had no issue with shadowing the park in the 45 storey proposal. They found the height too tall as the in force policy for the area requires transition from "gateway" sites such as the Jarvis/Dundas corner. Mid-block locations like this only had precedence for shorter heights. Thus the 36 storeys.
 
innsertnamehere said:
If you read the decision the LPAT had no issue with shadowing the park in the 45 storey proposal. They found the height too tall as the in force policy for the area requires transition from "gateway" sites such as the Jarvis/Dundas corner. Mid-block locations like this only had precedence for shorter heights. Thus the 36 storeys.
Click to expand...

Except the intersection heights allowed are far too restrictive. Occasionally, a proposal like this manages to get through and I get massing that appeals to me. Wishful thinking on my part. I suppose I'll have to wait for design preferences in Toronto to change. And btw, I would have preferred more shade in the park. 90% of people in Allan Gardens seem to gravitate to the shade already.
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
If you read the decision the LPAT had no issue with shadowing the park in the 45 storey proposal. They found the height too tall as the in force policy for the area requires transition from "gateway" sites such as the Jarvis/Dundas corner. Mid-block locations like this only had precedence for shorter heights. Thus the 36 storeys.
Click to expand...
Thanks!
isaidso said:
Except the intersection heights allowed are far too restrictive. Occasionally, a proposal like this manages to get through and I get massing that appeals to me. Wishful thinking on my part. I suppose I'll have to wait for design preferences in Toronto to change. And btw, I would have preferred more shade in the park. 90% of people in Allan Gardens seem to gravitate to the shade already.
Click to expand...
Well there's where you're getting the height restriction from: the mid-block building is supposed to be shorter than one at the intersection which would be cut at a height to prevent further shading of the park.

@isaidso, you may want more shade in the park from surrounding buildings, but the City wants it from trees they grow… and you only get conditions for vigorous growth when you've got enough light hitting the park.

42
 
Certain builders are known for quality, others known for huge profits and use of "33 cents tiles".
 
pianiel said:
Considering builder can't build anything without the fund from investor, and Toronto desperately need new development. Investors indeed do a lot for the city.

New homes essentially are all joint venture between builder and investor.
Click to expand...
The commodification of housing as a profit-driven investment rather than as *shelter* in the last 20-ish years has driven our housing crisis far harder than the YIMBY-driven cries for deregulation and faster approvals. Your concern for someone's 'value appreciating' is nauseating.
 
ProjectEnd said:
The commodification of housing as a profit-driven investment rather than as *shelter* in the last 20-ish years has driven our housing crisis far harder than the YIMBY-driven cries for deregulation and faster approvals. Your concern for someone's 'value appreciating' is nauseating.
Click to expand...

You wouldn't blame developer for making profit, would you? Yet they are the most greedy investor of all.
And you wouldn't blame the government, because democracy makes you feel empowered, yet the truth is city gets a share in the gain on house price. They keep increasing levies and taxes while affordability is a concern.

Everyone tries to squeeze every drop of profit in this business.
 
Last edited:
20191229_100246.jpg
20191229_100320.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top