Milaisacat
Active Member
https://archive.ph/GCCQq Try that.
- Thread starter urbandreamer
- Start date
nightstreak
Senior Member
Unpopular opinion: this does not meet expectations. Looks much nicer up close though. From afar, the Christmas tree hangers are a downgrade from the diagrid that was originally proposed. I wanted to withhold my opinion until much of the cladding was complete and now that it is and you can see the tower's form and materials, I'm just not sold. It's rather boring and a downgrade from the ambition that was initially expressed.
The diagrid in a photo from @Marcanadian in 2015:
Once up close, you can see the high quality of materials and I'm sure the street presence will be fantastic but on the skyline, it just doesn't measure up to the expectations of a Sir Norman Foster that took a decade to build.
UpwithOlives
Active Member
True that it's attractive from the exterior, but I thinks the diagrid would disrupt the view from too many units. Not every buyer appreciates that aesthetic.Unpopular opinion: this does not meet expectations. Looks much nicer up close though. From afar, the Christmas tree hangers are a downgrade from the diagrid that was originally proposed. I wanted to withhold my opinion until much of the cladding was complete and now that it is and you can see the tower's form and materials, I'm just not sold. It's rather boring and a downgrade from the ambition that was initially expressed.
The diagrid in a photo from @Marcanadian in 2015:
Once up close, you can see the high quality of materials and I'm sure the street presence will be fantastic but on the skyline, it just doesn't measure up to the expectations of a Sir Norman Foster that took a decade to build.
kotsy
Senior Member
I always right click on the link to the page (either on this forum/reddit post/etc) or the star's main page then copy link address.
Rascacielo
Senior Member
Not to mention that had that been the chosen design, it would’ve cost even more. Given the goings-on with Mizrahi & partners, the project would’ve grounded to a halt sooner than it did, probably early enough to be scrapped altogether.
Last edited:
Strange Advance
Active Member
The top of this sucker is taking ages.
dob467
Active Member
Why does this whole cancellation of purchase agreements feel like people were duped into helping the developer secure financial backing for the project, only for those customers to be left in the lurch in the end? I get the project changed developers, but still, cancelling pre-construction purchase agreements in order to sell units at a higher price closer to project completion seems wrong to me.
Essentially, the earlier plan for the building proved to not be financially viable, hence the receivership. When a new developer takes over, it's par for the course for previous contracts to be cancelled, as the new developer typically looks for ways to make completing the building make financial sense.
42
thaivic
Senior Member
Wrong but sadly legal.
Riseth
Senior Member
November 18, 2025
jer1961
Active Member
Well, seems to be back to normal now - seemed to be up earlier but to a max of 2m each photo, now up to regular size that I can post.... These are all from Friday (Nov. 14), so already a little dated.
As compared to the previous Friday, the crown is the same, and the east and north Rail Climbing Systems are up a level or two, with the visible installed glass still at level 74.
www.flickr.com
www.flickr.com
As compared to the previous Friday, the crown is the same, and the east and north Rail Climbing Systems are up a level or two, with the visible installed glass still at level 74.
One Bloor West (The One) construction
Photos of One Bloor West (The One) construction progress, including a "before" shot from 2011 and several from 2015 after the demolition of Stollery's. Notable for becoming Canada's first supertall building, i.e., over 300 metres (985 feet) tall. (The CN Tower does not fall under the definition...
www.flickr.com
One Bloor West (The One) "time-lapse"
From October, 2020, as above-ground construction started in earnest at The One (1 Bloor W.) in Toronto. More or less a weekly photo usually taken on a Friday, with some gaps during early-on construction hiatuses. The initial photographs are from 2015, during demolition at the site, 2018, during...
www.flickr.com
Rascacielo
Senior Member
Today
dob467
Active Member
I've always been suspect about buying pre-construction, mostly because new buildings often seem to take awhile to work out all the kinks even when occupied. But if now developers essentially are saying they'll take your money to get a project off the ground but then cancel that contract if they think they can make more money, I don't know what message that sends for consumer confidence. But hey housing in this city is just an investment tool to make a profit, right? Shameful.
The fine print in condo purchase contracts has always allowed developers to cancel under certain circumstances, that's not new. Developers do not typically want to cancel though as they have reputations to build at the same time they are putting their housing up. Cancelations are therefore rare, usually the result of worst-case scenarios. Nevertheless, the possibility of cancelation of any project exists, so there are those, yourself included, who are wary of pre-construction purchases, and no knock on them.
This, however, is not the simple scenario of a developer taking money and then canceling, just because, as you seem to be characterizing it. There is a very complicated financial situation here that sent this building into receivership. and has ended up with a new developer cancelling contracts that the defunct one agreed to. If the original contracts did not cover the cost of construction, then to get the building finished — which everyone who lives in this city has an interest in (we do not want unfinished blight on our skyline for any reason) — the new developer can seek approval to cancel the original contracts if they believe that it's the best way to get the building completed. It's a sad situation, but if there's no further money coming from the existing situation, a new situation has to be sought out. This is not simply a case of looking to make a profit (which is how every private company in every sector of the economy operates): if you've been following this project, you'll understand that this move by Tridel is an attempt on behalf of its client and the project's chief creditor, KEB Hana Bank of South Korea, to lose less money on this building.
42
UtakataNoAnnex
Superstar
I would posit that what happen here was a "'worse case scenario" as the original developer had no intention of defaulting on this but was forced to under the circumstance. I won't get into how he was most likely to be blamed for this...as I don't think that's important for this exercise. The current developer had to change the unit pricing that would of likely been in disagreement of what folks had paid for purchasing those to try to get back some of the end's meet over this tower. So best and likely ethical thing to do here is to cancel purchases and start anew.
I am also pretty sure there where legal clauses written into the agreements with each purchase that this could actually happen. And the purchasers signed in on that...
...again to stress, I do not like this. But it is what it is, for good or bad. /sigh
I am also pretty sure there where legal clauses written into the agreements with each purchase that this could actually happen. And the purchasers signed in on that...
...again to stress, I do not like this. But it is what it is, for good or bad. /sigh
Last edited: