News   Jul 17, 2024
Side-by-Side The Davisville and Uovo Top Off on Yonge in Midtown
 534     0 
News   Jul 17, 2024
Midtown Resubmission Adds Height, Density, Matches Adjacent Proposal
 1.5K     2 
News   Jul 17, 2024
News Roundup for July 17, 2024
 634     0 

Stumps

migtree said:
Exactly... A looming recession could definitely stall any project if the money dries up. As for Bazis, they are just one example I thought of... any developer could have such problems, as proven with Brookfield's Bay Adelaide.
Click to expand...

As far as I know, Brookfield has not experienced any major financial problems with Bay Adelaide whatsoever. They're even planning to build a second tower next door before they've even secured tenants for it. That's how confident they are.

The Bay Adelaide project that went bankrupt was a joint effort between Markborough Properties and TrizecHahn.
 
The Brazis chatter is pure speculation at this point. That being said I'm not sure why many of you are so defensive regarding potential impending project failures. If hypothetically we are indeed at the threshhold of a 1981 or 1990 downturn expect to see substantial numbers of project cancelations and developer bankruptcies. In such an instance history would suggest there is no safety in company size or reputation. You could expect to see the majority of, not just a few, developers who are in business today going under.
 
Bangkok was in the middle of a large construction boom when the Asian Currency Crisis happened (capital flight). The landscape was littered with the rusting cranes of countless abandoned projects for the better part of a decade.

It will take more than a common cyclical recession to cause something like that in Toronto. And people won't be calling it a "downturn." There would have to be a significant underlying crisis or disaster.
 
grey said:
As far as I know, Brookfield has not experienced any major financial problems with Bay Adelaide whatsoever. They're even planning to build a second tower next door before they've even secured tenants for it. That's how confident they are.

The Bay Adelaide project that went bankrupt was a joint effort between Markborough Properties and TrizecHahn.
Click to expand...

Bay Adelaide stump 2? Return of the stump!
 
grey said:
Bazis didn't design 1 Bloor. In fact, you can thank local Toronto architect, Roy Varacalli :p
Click to expand...

well in fact the original design on 1BE was much nicer looking, it was because Bazis gave specific instructions to 'maximize sellable floor area' that we ended up with this BOX (no better way to achieve maximum GFA but to create one big square) ... owners always have the final control over the architect
 
Solaris said:
it was because Bazis gave specific instructions to 'maximize sellable floor area' that we ended up with this BOX
Click to expand...
Your assumption is incorrect. The City was more responsible for the boxification than Bazis. They required that the curves to be flattened due to wind tunnel issues. Read page 47 of the 1 Bloor thread.
 
grey said:
Your assumption is incorrect. The City was more responsible for the boxification than Bazis. They required that the curves to be flattened due to wind tunnel issues. Read page 47 of the 1 Bloor thread.
Click to expand...

I can see that. If you want to feel what angles and curves on buildings contribute to the wind tunnel effect, go to the corner of Bay & St. Joseph. It's a perpetual hurricane. They had to landscape the sidewalk garden on St. Joseph St. outside the Polo Club 3 times before they got it right. The winds were so powerful they were blowing topsoil and wood chips across the street to 1001 Bay.
 
City Planning has only a part to do with the Boxification of the design... it is largely driven by Bazis

I was once related with Young & Wright architects and the reason the firm was dropped from the project when the site was sold to Bazis was because the original Kolter proposal (shown below) did not yield enough floor space to sell

28toronto-oneblooreast-old.jpg
 
Solaris said:
City Planning has only a part to do with the Boxification of the design... it is largely driven by Bazis

I was once related with Young & Wright architects and the reason the firm was dropped from the project when the site was sold to Bazis was because the original Kolter proposal (shown below) did not yield enough floor space to sell

28toronto-oneblooreast-old.jpg
Click to expand...

IIRC, everyone was pretty happy when that design fell through, anyway.

Varacalli's original (re)design of 1 Bloor satisfied Bazis' internal volume requirements and had sexy curves, but the city said "nope."
 
The Tridel condos at Richmond and Sherbourne were also built over a parking garage. Interestingly all these examples were former commercial properties.
 
As I recall, the Richmond/Sherbourne parking garage dated back to at least the early 80s.

Also don't forget the parking lot at Richmond + Victoria, and how that was plowed up last year to remove the foundation of an aborted 80s project...
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top