Search results

Yes but it's in a high profile location at VMC and Metrolinx and the Province (for reasons all their own) spent billions to extend the subway here instead of other transit options. You can bet your butt this project will be back on the market next year with a much higher pricepoint. Developers...

I disagree, the randomness of the podium is great, why should everything be square and tidy? It looks very interesting and will draw a lot of attention.

Syo Stop teasing. :)

There may be a bonus for the contractor to deliver by a certain date - the earlier the delivery, the bigger the bonus.

I received pricing info on the one bedroom + den units. (and some others). $780,000 - 640 sq. ft. it doesn't say what the fees are but I'm assuming $1,000+ parking space extra (while they last). So with the min. down payment (say $53,000) someone - 0r more likely some couple - would have to...

It says he is he hopes he will be announcing a tenant soon - which sounds like "developer speak" for "we have a tenant".

Looks like a teaser for Amazon. Surrounded by every type of transit (subway, GO, bus, streetcar) and highway access the city has to offer plus its proximity to habourfront, CBD and all major sports venues - it's quite a prize location.

^ definitely no rush here.

I don’t think “height” (shadows etc.) per se is the issue with a commercial building. Risk for the developer increases with every floor - that’s why we don’t see many “super tall” office towers anywhere. Most developers are having trouble leasing buildings much smaller. I understand there are...

Just curious - do you actually enjoy the balcony at 66 floors? Seems just too high to want to spend much time in it.

The King Street Pilot is a shining example of how badly this city’s transit program has been neglected for the past decades. We should have been building subways over the years instead we are still stuck with transit and cars fighting to use the same cramped arteries. New York had the...

And now that there is no OMB there is no recourse.

How do these “standards” decide it's ok to put a shadow on some people but five feet further it’s unacceptable? If shadows are so offensive, why do we allow them at all? And if we decide shadows are inevitable what’s the criteria for acceptable or unacceptable shadows? Sounds more like a tool...

Why not Oxford at the convention centre? Thats the site for a significant building. Plus it's more central. 30 Bay is too far south to be as connected as it would need to be.

To be honest, there is no "common sense" - and that includes the "Studies". Who decides what degree of shadow is acceptable and at what point are shadows not acceptable?. It's a big city with big buildings - there's going to be shadows. Reducing the height of a building by 5 or 6 floors...

To be fair, the architect is given parameters by the developer and the building cost of construction must fit within a prescribed budget. Don't yell at the architects, it's the greedy developers that should be receiving your anger.

Stone would be nice but it is heavy (costs) and stains easily. Down the road you have to reclad anyway (a.k.a. FCP)

It could work if they reclad the existing building.