Chronamut
Senior Member
Is it.. done..? I can never tell if those black parts are finished or not, or if it's some odd variation they'd decided to put in..
innsertnamehere
Superstar
It sort of surprisingly isn’t occupied yet I don’t think.. certainly very very close.
Midtown Urbanist
Superstar
Likely waiting to receive occupancy permits from the city. Occupancy date is slated for "Spring 2024" in the marketing materials.
Sunnyside
Senior Member
I’m glad this is the first building that’s getting center stage downtown. There are some quality nitpicks, but it’s done enough things right to earn its address. The vibe of King William itself is leagues ahead with how this frames the street now, too. I can’t wait to see the effect all the new residents will have on downtown activity.
Chris R.
Senior Member
Posted by Jason Thorne:
KingJames
Active Member
I am also excited to see who they pull in for ground floor commercial tenants, hopefully building on the restaurant row vibe. And wouldn't this be the kick the owner of the x-Zellers lot to the west needs to finally get a plan together and complement it all?
Hawrylyshyn
Active Member
That would definitely be the dream to see something finally get built on that lot
innsertnamehere
Superstar
IIRC Blanchard owns it, no?
KingJames
Active Member
I thought it was one of the Desantis brothers
Canuck905
Active Member
Is there a reason why this building has aviation obstruction lights and other newer buildings, such as the Marquee, don't? I would assume that this might relate to the heli-pad at the hospital but just curious if anyone knows. Also, I would assume the Design District, Tivoli, 73 Hughson, etc. will likely all require aviation obstruction lights too.
TheHonestMaple
Active Member
LIkely due to the new regulation that came into effect in 2012. Basically any new building above a certain height and distance to airport/aerodrome would require lighting. This is probably the first new construction building since 2012 that meets that new requirement.
Prior to the amendments, the requirements were drafted more as recommended standards, and not mandatory regulation. Although the vast majority of persons responsible for obstacles to air navigation were already marking and lighting these structures, the amendments clarify the minimum marking and lighting requirements and are designed to reflect current technological advances. The new amendments will ensure uniform continued compliance, and ultimately provide greater security for those navigating the skies.
Prior to the amendments, the requirements were drafted more as recommended standards, and not mandatory regulation. Although the vast majority of persons responsible for obstacles to air navigation were already marking and lighting these structures, the amendments clarify the minimum marking and lighting requirements and are designed to reflect current technological advances. The new amendments will ensure uniform continued compliance, and ultimately provide greater security for those navigating the skies.
Wigs
Active Member
I like the way they oriented the buildings so almost everyone on the upper (>5-6 storeys) floors should (in theory) get a view.
Overall, this development has exceeded my expectations.
Nice job, LiUNA
Chris R.
Senior Member
Today:
KingJames
Active Member
why must we have idiots tagging up new buildings (or old ones for that matter)
Chronamut
Senior Member
Wish they'd repaint the green cornice next to the sales office.. it's one of the only buildings that hasn't been restored in some way in that block.
Also they can probably powerwash that graffiti off.
Also those new trees need to be stabilized, that one is leaning towards the building - it's gonna grow up weird.
Also they can probably powerwash that graffiti off.
Also those new trees need to be stabilized, that one is leaning towards the building - it's gonna grow up weird.