Just a general question, but does anyone do the numbers and say “nah, we don’t need a couple more thousand people living here right now, or in projections in 15yrs from now”?

Like im sure finances will cause delays themselves, but can the city look at the economy, look at the stock of unsold condo units, drop in office rental, vacancy in retail space etc and just say “no” to this?

Is it just short term thinking to increase the tax base?
 
dgto said:
The pick up and drop off is embarrassingly bad and a huge waste of space.
Click to expand...

Agree. Just when it seems Toronto is ready to urbanize/join the 21st century we get 1970s car centric crap like this and Therme.. Shockingly, even Aqualuna has car infrastructure built next to it where there should have been NONE. You expect it in places like Houston and Mississauga butToronto? At this rate, we're never going to get there.
 
xmyth_ said:
Just a general question, but does anyone do the numbers and say “nah, we don’t need a couple more thousand people living here right now, or in projections in 15yrs from now”?
Click to expand...

If you mean the proponent. No.

Keeping in mind that not every proposal is real, that some are just about goosing land value, maybe for sale, or maybe to leverage debt w/the land as collateral.

Or it could be real, in which case it's about maximizing one-time income (sales), or creating longer-term cashflow.

Certainly the number of people interested in buying/renting, and the price they are willing and able to pay will factor into a proposal, but not as esoteric question, just one about whether the numbers work.

xmyth_ said:
Like im sure finances will cause delays themselves, but can the city look at the economy, look at the stock of unsold condo units, drop in office rental, vacancy in retail space etc and just say “no” to this?
Click to expand...

In short, 'No'.

The site is already zoned for this now, this is just the Site Plan stage. It doesn't even go back to Council.

xmyth_ said:
Is it just short term thinking to increase the tax base?
Click to expand...

Not relevant to the City's decision making powers/authorities here.

Also, not really impactful to the City's finances at this stage.

It would be, if the project moves ahead..............but really when you adjust for the cost of servicing the new residents, it's not a windfall for the City.
 
The likely best way to impact in what's going up here from a citizen point of view is to complain here how awful this proposal is...

...and hopefully someone with influence at Oxford P will read that and take note, and make improvements accordingly. Yes...that's still a snowball's chance in Hell, but likely better than bothering The City who already has washed their hands over this. /sigh
 
This is STILL one of the worst, most pitiful downgrades in design that I’ve ever seen here in recent years. Everything about it; the 2 incredibly basic boring smaller towers & the surrounding second rate, awkward park & public space, is substandard. Oxford Properties dropped the ball big time. This is supposed to be top tier, upper level, doesn’t get any better, prime location for downtown building. More disappointed that it’s Hariri Pontarini as lead architect. And also, Blue Jays need a new baseball stadium once the reno upgrade hoopla dies down in another 4-5 years. SkyDome looking clunky & outdated now.
 
Since this was bumped, was talked about in part in this front page article here:

urbantoronto.ca

Toronto’s Tallest: 'Supertalls' Shaping the Skyline | UrbanToronto

Toronto’s skyline is on the verge of a dramatic transformation, with multiple 'supertalls' planned or under construction. From SkyTower and One Bloor West to College Park’s 96-storey centrepiece, these projects promise to reshape the city’s architectural profile for decades to come.
urbantoronto.ca urbantoronto.ca
 
Skyhighzz said:
This is STILL one of the worst, most pitiful downgrades in design that I’ve ever seen here in recent years. Everything about it; the 2 incredibly basic boring smaller towers & the surrounding second rate, awkward park & public space, is substandard. Oxford Properties dropped the ball big time. This is supposed to be top tier, upper level, doesn’t get any better, prime location for downtown building. More disappointed that it’s Hariri Pontarini as lead architect. And also, Blue Jays need a new baseball stadium once the reno upgrade hoopla dies down in another 4-5 years. SkyDome looking clunky & outdated now.
Click to expand...

This isn't getting built. There's no planned start date, the condo market is shit and it's unlikely to improve in the near term. When it does, developers are going to have to stand out and a boring condo is not going to cut it. I see this being revised a handful of times before it dies down and then comes back as a completely redesigned building, potentially office as that market has the potential to grow in the coming years and particularly at this given location.
 
nightstreak said:
This isn't getting built. There's no planned start date, the condo market is shit and it's unlikely to improve in the near term. When it does, developers are going to have to stand out and a boring condo is not going to cut it. I see this being revised a handful of times before it dies down and then comes back as a completely redesigned building, potentially office as that market has the potential to grow in the coming years and particularly at this given location.
Click to expand...

Post-90s bust condos wasn't good for condo designs.

AoD
 
Skyhighzz said:
This is STILL one of the worst, most pitiful downgrades in design that I’ve ever seen here in recent years. Everything about it; the 2 incredibly basic boring smaller towers & the surrounding second rate, awkward park & public space, is substandard. Oxford Properties dropped the ball big time. This is supposed to be top tier, upper level, doesn’t get any better, prime location for downtown building. More disappointed that it’s Hariri Pontarini as lead architect. And also, Blue Jays need a new baseball stadium once the reno upgrade hoopla dies down in another 4-5 years. SkyDome looking clunky & outdated now.
Click to expand...
Sad to hear this. Hopefully, it changes.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
Post-90s bust condos wasn't good for condo designs.

AoD
Click to expand...

Toronto is quite a different city today than it was in the early 2000s. The developer opportunities are at the upper end of the market. i.e. luxury condos. The vast inventory of existing — and now aging — condos are what's going to be left for the poors in resale as 2000 condo boom owners upgrade, whereas new builds start to fall in the category of Forma, One Bloor West, College Park, Sky Tower, etc. Expensive showy towers that stand out specifically because of their ostentatious appearance. Union Park is designed for the CityPlace my first condo era that it just missed.
 
nightstreak said:
This isn't getting built. There's no planned start date, the condo market is shit and it's unlikely to improve in the near term. When it does, developers are going to have to stand out and a boring condo is not going to cut it. I see this being revised a handful of times before it dies down and then comes back as a completely redesigned building, potentially office as that market has the potential to grow in the coming years and particularly at this given location.
Click to expand...
It doesn’t matter if it’s getting built or not getting built. The point of having the brazen audacity to post this second-rate real life design at a real point in time for all to see, should be admonished a million times over. Shame them again & again. Hopefully Oxford Properties don’t shamelessly cheap out like that again on their next project. And HP continue with their high architectural standards. They definitely heard the noise.
 
So it looks like I have to remind people to stay away from ad hominem... because those who keep it up, will lose posting privileges. Depending on the severity, it could be anything from a short vacay from UT to a long vacay …but repeat offenders will get loooong or permanent time outs. Basically, I'd like to see members explaining their positions, and not dropping them as bombs. I'd also like to see members not posting "my correct opinion" unless it's absolutely clear that they are joking around. Claimed infallibility and inflexibility doesn't help in discussion forums!

I don't need people responding to this post directly in this thread (message me if you feel you need to talk about it)... I just want to see behaviours mellow out enough that people get along. Thanks!

42
 
I'm probably being naive, but if this project does indeed flare out as some have predicted, what are the chances of the park proposal being revived?
 
DavidJamesTO said:
I'm probably being naive, but if this project does indeed flare out as some have predicted, what are the chances of the park proposal being revived?
Click to expand...

The park has been incrementally decimated updated after update, until it was completely gone in the latest one. This is why I'd rather see this complex become office towers, which could come with zoning conditions stipulated by the city to build community green space over the corridor, as CIBC Square did. A condo project doesn't have that kind of budget nor motivation.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top