Toronto 365 Church Condos | 102.1m | 31s | Menkes | Wallman Architects

WanderLust said:
I'm willing to bet quite a big chunk o change that this isn't going to get built as per original proposed application, nor the modified reduced height submission to the OMB. It will get developed eventually, but not as '365 Church' that's for sure. Rule of thumb ... if there's a street with houses on it, don't propose blocking one end of that street with a 'tall building'.
Click to expand...



Wanderlust Quote: "This might one of the few condo developments that just doesn't get built. Menkes should consider selling the land to Ryerson"

I know for a fact that this will get approved and built as a tall building of at least 20 storeys. Best to hang on to your change, Wanderlust...unless of course you want to lose it!
 
ThomasJ said:
Wanderlust Quote: "This might one of the few condo developments that just doesn't get built. Menkes should consider selling the land to Ryerson"

I know for a fact that this will get approved and built as a tall building of at least 20 storeys. Best to hang on to your change, Wanderlust...unless of course you want to lose it!
Click to expand...

Well i think they will at least get the 25s, and doubt they are walking away and selling the land to Ryerson...Hahaha:D the way the Ryerson name is thrown around on this forum, you would think that they were in the real-estate business.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Well i think they will at least get the 25s, and doubt they are walking away and selling the land to Ryerson...Hahaha:D the way the Ryerson name is thrown around on this forum, you would think that they were in the real-estate business.
Click to expand...

with ryerson building the new residence, it takes away the available renters for the pool of condos coming up around the area.
all the increased supply will affect prices and rents.
 
cdr108 said:
with ryerson building the new residence, it takes away the available renters for the pool of condos coming up around the area.
all the increased supply will affect prices and rents.
Click to expand...


very astute point. though i would make the case that menkes' building would be of a different (read: better) spec than ryerson's residence. so you'll still cater to the crowd that wants to live in a better building (or benefit from the cache that it brings).

also, i've been of the opinion that this building will be geared more toward the "rainbow" end users rather than the students. yes there is cross-appeal, but just a hunch that i have. the units will hold up just fine from an investor point of view.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Well i think they will at least get the 25s, and doubt they are walking away and selling the land to Ryerson...Hahaha:D the way the Ryerson name is thrown around on this forum, you would think that they were in the real-estate business.
Click to expand...

So I guess when they built the student residences across the street, being limited to the 'low-rise' status, that didn't mean anything. Building something 3x taller across the street, impacting the streets all around it, and asking to be smack up against the street, on all impacted streets, is going to get passed. Probably not. Oh, forgot ... Menkes paid how much for that parcel of land ? They're going to settle for 25 storeys ? 20 storeys ? 15 storeys ? The lower it goes, out goes any profit. That's the reality of the situation. Don't say what you think should go there, i.e. taller the better, think about what they paid for the land, what they think they can 'profit' from the parcel of land, and if they're knocked down too much, then they realize no profit. That's why I suggested they consider selling to Ryerson, maybe take a loss, lots of benefits to taking losses tax-wise, so that's why I reckon Menkes isn't promoting this much further because they realize they bought a lemon of a plot. So, once again, I DOUBT this is going to be built as 30 storey, 25 storey, and if they have to settle for 18 storeys, they'll cut their losses and sell.
 
Automation Gallery said:
Is it my imagination, or does not east-end proposed development seem to get caught up in a bunch of more red tape than anywhere else in the city:confused:
Click to expand...
Yes. There are still lots of streets with houses on them east of Yonge, Coronation-type streets, i.e. the BBC series ... don't forget Cabbagetown, world's largest still-in-tact tract of Victorian-type houses, so no wonder there's hesitation, or out-right denial, of developers' bids to create squash this. Just because a developer was stupid enough to pay x-amount million$ for a parcel of land 'to develop', doesn't mean it's going to happen. Sometimes developers make mistakes. Please stop thinking bigger-picture post-card of what Toronto 'should' look like, think more inside the box and think what can Toronto handle. We all love skyscrapers, but not necessarily in our backyards.
 
WanderLust said:
Yes. There are still lots of streets with houses on them east of Yonge, Coronation-type streets, i.e. the BBC series ... don't forget Cabbagetown, world's largest still-in-tact tract of Victorian-type houses, so no wonder there's hesitation, or out-right denial, of developers' bids to create squash this. Just because a developer was stupid enough to pay x-amount million$ for a parcel of land 'to develop', doesn't mean it's going to happen. Sometimes developers make mistakes. Please stop thinking bigger-picture post-card of what Toronto 'should' look like, think more inside the box and think what can Toronto handle. We all love skyscrapers, but not necessarily in our backyards.
Click to expand...


"not in our backyard" ....and with that, we have the cousin of NIMBY.....NIOBY! Welcome, Wanderlust!
 
Torontovibe said:
Most of us on this site LOVE tall skyscrapers right in our backyard.
Click to expand...


ah, yes....the IMBYs. i agree with you in that most of us here are IMBYs; however, i would say that i've noticed quite a bit of NIMBYs (aka NIOBYs) as well.

p.s. hello Wanderlust :)
 
Automation Gallery said:
Is it my imagination, or does not east-end proposed development seem to get caught up in a bunch of more red tape than anywhere else in the city:confused:
Click to expand...

There's significant heritage, including many dense heritage areas from Yonge eastward which makes development in many areas rather sensitive and the pressure is on to develop eastward. There must - and will be significant development in the years and decades to come in this area but it needs to be in appropriate areas.
 
Everyone knows that this section of Church street was a dismal stretch, just north of ever-expanding RU. RU has slowly but surely taken over a lot of the east downtown, from Dundas north and Yonge eastward, up to and including Church/Carlton (MLG). Tall condos just don't make sense in this dismal stretch, but something to do with Ryerson does. Menkes best get talking with Ryerson on how best to take a loss because they're not going to be able to make a profit building a 15 storey condo building.
 
I think the reason why the east side of downtown really drops off in height; unlike the west, is because of Church St. In my opinion, when you're one major street over from Yonge, you should be building tall. Right beside short 2 storey houses if you have to, even.
 
WanderLust said:
Everyone knows that this section of Church street was a dismal stretch, just north of ever-expanding RU. RU has slowly but surely taken over a lot of the east downtown, from Dundas north and Yonge eastward, up to and including Church/Carlton (MLG). Tall condos just don't make sense in this dismal stretch, but something to do with Ryerson does. Menkes best get talking with Ryerson on how best to take a loss because they're not going to be able to make a profit building a 15 storey condo building.
Click to expand...


dude - give it up already. your annoyingly repetitive message about menkes has already been articulated. move on.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top