generalcanada
Senior Member
that building is "450 the well". i looked online and some people can move in starting monday. Most suites are available starting september
Toronto The Well | 174.03m | 46s | RioCan | Hariri Pontarini
- Thread starter yyzer
- Start date
kotsy
Senior Member
Nailed it - lighting is almost everything in a photo then composition. But it takes a talented photographer to get this right and you have and I don't think it's any fluke!
T.E.C.II
Active Member
When is this expected to be completed?
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
Big hints for skycandy-san to take moar pics! <3
Obsidian
Active Member
Did the residential portions of the Well beginning construction before the province banned all glass exteriors. I believe the most residential building can have is 40% now.
If not, how are they getting away with a much higher window wall component. I assume the smaller buildings are doing double duty to bring down the glass content so the towers can have more glass.
I never was a fan of the province making this change and it is why i believe a lot of the newer towers since this change came into effect look subpar. The well is the only development since the change that looks to have more glass as in older buildings that were able to have 100% glass to my eye.
for example we got exteriors like 18 Yonge in the past with near 100% glass exteriors and now we get 11 YV, 88 Queens, Social at Church, 199 Church which are all doing inventive things to reduce the glass content of their exteriors
18 Yonge beside 11YV
88 Queen
Social at Church + Dundas and 199 Church
If not, how are they getting away with a much higher window wall component. I assume the smaller buildings are doing double duty to bring down the glass content so the towers can have more glass.
I never was a fan of the province making this change and it is why i believe a lot of the newer towers since this change came into effect look subpar. The well is the only development since the change that looks to have more glass as in older buildings that were able to have 100% glass to my eye.
for example we got exteriors like 18 Yonge in the past with near 100% glass exteriors and now we get 11 YV, 88 Queens, Social at Church, 199 Church which are all doing inventive things to reduce the glass content of their exteriors
18 Yonge beside 11YV
88 Queen
Social at Church + Dundas and 199 Church
Last edited:
junctionist
Senior Member
I haven't lived in an all-glass tower, but I've read many complaints of units becoming too hot or too cold and high energy bills. The proponents of glass towers will tell you that the glass has gas between the panes for insulation.
But that won't be as effective for insulating the building as brick, stone, or precast panels, especially as the seals break down and the gas starts to be released. Developers should have shifted to using to more brick, precast, and stone to meet the new building code requirements instead of trashy spandrel panels.
But that won't be as effective for insulating the building as brick, stone, or precast panels, especially as the seals break down and the gas starts to be released. Developers should have shifted to using to more brick, precast, and stone to meet the new building code requirements instead of trashy spandrel panels.
3Dementia
Senior Member
CBC Article including a video tour with David Pontarini of HPA:
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...fashion-district-affordable-housing-1.6904832
https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/toro...fashion-district-affordable-housing-1.6904832
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
...it's less flattering of its inclusionary aspects...or lack thereof though.
Obsidian
Active Member
well it was obviously they would got to the most cost effective method to meet the new regulations.
Now we are getting plenty of subpar towers going up.
but leads to my original question of how is the well getting away it all glass.
wmedia
Senior Member
I'm only guessing at this, but I would think that the new regulations maybe only apply to window wall, and The Well is using curtain wall?
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
The City of Toronto (in 2017) didn't really care about creating new Affordable Rental units --- when given a choice...
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
But, but...The City "didn't drop the ball" according to that linked article in question...
/ptptptptpttt
/ptptptptpttt
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
The City "didn't drop the ball" according to the RULES and SCORE-KEEPING methods that City Hall used in 2017...
Lot's of people THEN (and even NOW) --- don't really consider "Affordable Housing" to be a REAL "Community Benefit" --- it's just that the folks in the Suburbs say it "out-loud" more than the folks in TO Core do...
There's a strong bias that a REAL "Community Benefit" - is something that the WHOLE Community can use (eg. Daycare, Library, Splash Pad, Dog Park, Public Art, etc) - and therefore, new "Affordable Rental" units are an after-thought once the REAL stuff is secured.
just east of the creek
Senior Member
I’m not sure you addressed the question posed earlier in relation to the CBC article. The city contends that rules were not in place at the time that would allow them to insist on ‘Affordable Housing’.
The quote:
“At the time that The Well's zoning by-law amendments were approved, in 2017, there was no provincial inclusionary zoning regulation and the city didn't have the ability to require new affordable housing, the statement said.
The city is still waiting for provincial approval to implement inclusionary zoning and it won't apply retroactively, according to the department.“
If this is accurate, what scorecard was the city supposed to use? Moral persuasion goes only so far in a market that appears to fully support the pricing structure in place.
Having said all of that, the need for affordable housing is clear. How we make and meet those requirements is possibly less clear as we do not seem to be interested in all the possible tools in the tool bag. And our ability to move with speed and purpose is layered in politics.
The quote:
“At the time that The Well's zoning by-law amendments were approved, in 2017, there was no provincial inclusionary zoning regulation and the city didn't have the ability to require new affordable housing, the statement said.
The city is still waiting for provincial approval to implement inclusionary zoning and it won't apply retroactively, according to the department.“
If this is accurate, what scorecard was the city supposed to use? Moral persuasion goes only so far in a market that appears to fully support the pricing structure in place.
Having said all of that, the need for affordable housing is clear. How we make and meet those requirements is possibly less clear as we do not seem to be interested in all the possible tools in the tool bag. And our ability to move with speed and purpose is layered in politics.
HousingNowTO
Senior Member
Even without “Inclusionary Zoning” laws - the City could (and should) have allocated more of their Development Charge and Section-37 revenues from these Developments into the provision of net new Affordable Housing units.
That was 100% within the City’s power to choose to do with the Rules that existed in 2017.
Example - Almost 80% MORE money from THE WELL project was dedicated to ---- Uhhhm... "Public Art" [$900-K], than was dedicated to - "new (*off-site) Affordable Housing units" [$500-K] in 2017.
*Local-Voices & City Staff did NOT see "New Affordable Rental" as a REAL "Community Benefit".
It was an afterthought in almost all of these kinds of negotiations prior to the 2018 elections.