Toronto Time and Space Condos | 101.8m | 29s | Pemberton | Wallman Architects

GenerationLee said:
That's a bit optimistic. Well, the first part. There's a lot of empty units these days in this investor driven market...either due to people wanting it empty, or to rent out for income, or something else. I mean, there'll be over 1500 people most likely in this bunker...but I'm not convinced there'll be a lot of families in comparisoj to the total unit count, simply due to pricing, sizes of units and well, this being a newer building.
Click to expand...
Rental vacancies are at record lows. But yes, up to 90% of units in new buildings are investor owned. And they're usually occupied by young professional singles or couples working in the core. The average occupancy is 1.7 people per unit versus 2.4 for the city as a whole. There will be next to no conventional "families" in these buildings, but I think the OP was just welcoming new neighbors.
 
Undead said:
Rental vacancies are at record lows. But yes, up to 90% of units in new buildings are investor owned. And they're usually occupied by young professional singles or couples working in the core. The average occupancy is 1.7 people per unit versus 2.4 for the city as a whole. There will be next to no conventional "families" in these buildings, but I think the OP was just welcoming new neighbors.
Click to expand...
"up to 90% of units in new buildings are investor owned"

Interesting, I had no idea it was that high. Do you have a source for this?
 
beautifulwar said:
what do you mean urban planning issues? I am new to urban toronto and trying to learn.

I know it is bigger than other places, but what else is wrong? I thought it is fine since there are other bigger condo building just on the north west corner.

I thought it can make more people so good for cafe and small restaurants. enough of the shoppers drug mart and boring places.
Click to expand...
Welcome to the forum!

Sorry, which condo is bigger on the north west corner? Did you mean 158 Front Street East? If so:

St. Lawrence Condos (158 Front St E) = 490 units (26 stories) source
Time & Space = 1,586 units (29 & 18 stories) source

That makes Time & Space roughly 3x the size as the condo on the north west corner of Front St. I know this isn't exact math, but that's quite the difference. Or did you mean another building?

As for the Urban Planning issues, numerous issues have been discussed at nausea throughout this thread – feel free to read previous pages in this forum.
 
Last edited:
TheSix said:
Welcome to the forum!

Sorry, which condo is bigger on the north west corner? Did you mean 158 Front Street East? If so:

St. Lawrence Condos (158 Front St E) = 490 units (26 stories) source
Time & Space = 1,586 units (29 & 18 stories) source

That makes Time & Space roughly 3x the size as the condo on the north west corner of Front St. I know this isn't exact math, but that's quite the difference. Or did you mean another building?

As for the Urban Planning issues, numerous issues have been discussed at nausea throughout this thread – feel free to read previous pages in this forum.
Click to expand...

Yeah i was referring to 158 Front st. More units = more cafes and restaurants in the area.

thread is over 150 pages dont see much except people complaining about the size and the design.
 
beautifulwar said:
Yeah i was referring to 158 Front st. More units = more cafes and restaurants in the area.

thread is over 150 pages dont see much except people complaining about the size and the design.
Click to expand...
That might give you a clue to the fact that many people here think this is a ghastly hulk that does not make any attempt to fit in.
 
beautifulwar said:
Yeah i was referring to 158 Front st. More units = more cafes and restaurants in the area.

thread is over 150 pages dont see much except people complaining about the size and the design.
Click to expand...

I won't go on at great length about the shortcomings of this proposal, but to give you an idea of what people on a very pro-development forum may see as issues with this particular proposal:

(in no particular order)

- parking is above ground (within the building)
- development lacks porosity (by which I mean it takes up an entire block, not just one direction, but in two.)
- development lacks even the illusion of granularity (trying to make the one big building seem smaller at street level by the changing of architectural expression), for a good example of this, see the Mirvish Village thread.
- the streetwall on Front Street is too high, its out of a character with the area, and being on the south side of the road, will create significant shadowing on Front Street. Note, this is about the podium height, not tower height.
- feels overbearing on the Esplanade side where buildings tend to be shorter; and all tend to exhibit an architectural expression more in line w/the history of the area.
- the architectural expression in terms of finishes is not considered particularly attractive by many members of the forum which doesn't help matters any.
 
I consider any group of people living together who are "related", however, they define that, to be a family. But yeah, I live across the street in an apartment with a toddler, and there are not many people with kids living in these apartments as a share of the total.

Still, show up at St. James on any Saturday or Sunday morning when the weather is nice, and you will see that there are still a lot of people with kids living in the area.
 
Northern Light said:
- development lacks porosity (by which I mean it takes up an entire block, not just one direction, but in two.)
Click to expand...

There is a mid-block east-west lane which should help in one direction. But yeah, it's a big wall from Sherbourne to Princess. But the north side has been one long wall as well (though with some granularity).
 
evandyk said:
There is a mid-block east-west lane which should help in one direction. But yeah, it's a big wall from Sherbourne to Princess. But the north side has been one long wall as well (though with some granularity).
Click to expand...

The north side was certainly no great work of architecture in its previous incarnation, but it wasn't one long wall either:

1647008368732.png


2 discrete buildings, and one parking lot.
 
  • Like
Reactions: DSC
I was referring to the north side of Front where there is no mid-block crossing point either. It has some granularity with the pet store and the music studios, but doesn't have much street life as the traffic in and out of the gas station was a real vibe killer.

But I'm not sure there's any other example in Toronto of an entire block podium that's seventeen stories high?
 
Northern Light said:
I won't go on at great length about the shortcomings of this proposal, but to give you an idea of what people on a very pro-development forum may see as issues with this particular proposal:

(in no particular order)

- parking is above ground (within the building)
- development lacks porosity (by which I mean it takes up an entire block, not just one direction, but in two.)
- development lacks even the illusion of granularity (trying to make the one big building seem smaller at street level by the changing of architectural expression), for a good example of this, see the Mirvish Village thread.
- the streetwall on Front Street is too high, its out of a character with the area, and being on the south side of the road, will create significant shadowing on Front Street. Note, this is about the podium height, not tower height.
- feels overbearing on the Esplanade side where buildings tend to be shorter; and all tend to exhibit an architectural expression more in line w/the history of the area.
- the architectural expression in terms of finishes is not considered particularly attractive by many members of the forum which doesn't help matters any.
Click to expand...
so it is mostly about the size and not fitting in. i agree it is strange with the parking above ground but at least this is nicer than the ugly gas station. I think the design if it was like something like the well which integrates retail space more that would be better but not all buildings can be like that.

i think church/front is much nicer area. and sherbourne/front needs re-development, all it is known for is the dollerama, bmo, and no frills.

Need more population to fund cafes, restaurants, and get rid of these big box stores or stores with zero personality.
 
TheSix said:
"up to 90% of units in new buildings are investor owned"

Interesting, I had no idea it was that high. Do you have a source for this?
Click to expand...
I'm still searching for where I heard the 90% figure, but here's the lower bound:

www.thestar.com

Toronto’s hot condo market eroding affordability ‘on an almost daily basis’

The dearth of condo listings in the last quarter of 2021 continues to fan competition as buyers jockey for fewer choices.
www.thestar.com www.thestar.com

"Hildebrand says about 70 per cent of pre-construction units are sold to investors"
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top