Toronto 399 Yonge | 252.3m | 75s | Capital Developments | Teeple Architects

Amare said:
Wow just the 2nd and 3rd floors out of 75 stories for affordable houding? I mean better than nothing but that seems pretty abysmal here.
Click to expand...

I look at this differently. this isnt part if a s37 and the city doesnt have power to ask for it so I assume this was how they got a deal with covenant. At 12 units a floor that's probably a $24 million revenue loss for the Developer.
 
Last edited:
Amare said:
Wow just the 2nd and 3rd floors out of 75 stories for affordable houding? I mean better than nothing but that seems pretty abysmal here.
Click to expand...

Don't get wrong, I agree w/your take, but @SonyPayStation is on point too. This is not so much a deal for the City, as a deal for Covenant House.

Also, note that the ZBA needs to be resubmitted anyway and there are details yet to be worked out.
 
innsertnamehere said:
7 elevators for ***810***(fixed that) units, at least it has an OK elevator ratio here..
Click to expand...
I'm not sure I'd capitalize OK in this case; at 1 per 115.7, while it's not screamingly far above 1 per 100… it's still 1 less elevator than I'd like to see. Eight would bring it down to 1 per 101.25, still over the threshold, but obviously very close, and close enough to what I think is acceptable.

I'm thinking that a good rule of thumb for buildings of various sizes could be;
• for buildings over 600 units, as many elevators as it takes to not be 2 elevators over the 1 per 100 threshold.
• for buildings between 300 and 599 units, as many elevators as it takes to not be 1 elevator over the threshold.
• for buildings between 200 and 299 units, as many elevators as it takes to be better than 1 elevator over the threshold.
• for buildings between 1 and 199 units, as many elevators as it takes to be better than 2 elevators over the threshold.

(The number of elevators needs to be higher in the smaller buildings to cover 1 elevator being broken down or in move-in/move-out service.)

So, 8 elevators would work well here, better than 7!

42
 
Is there no design review panel in this city to look at this monstrosity, and simply say no?
Another VEed Teeple monument to bad design and worse materials?
 
interchange42 said:
I'm thinking that a good rule of thumb for buildings of various sizes could be;
• for buildings over 600 units, as many elevators as it takes to not be 2 elevators over the 1 per 100 threshold.
• for buildings between 300 and 599 units, as many elevators as it takes to not be 1 elevator over the threshold.
• for buildings between 200 and 299 units, as many elevators as it takes to be better than 1 elevator over the threshold.
• for buildings between 1 and 199 units, as many elevators as it takes to be better than 2 elevators over the threshold.

(The number of elevators needs to be higher in the smaller buildings to cover 1 elevator being broken down or in move-in/move-out service.)

So, 8 elevators would work well here, better than 7!

42
Click to expand...
The ratio was slightly better at ROCP 1, but it was a disaster, so it depends on the quality of the elevators as well, and/or on the service contract. When I lived there, the building was brand new; yet the elevators at Manulife Centre, a much older building, are considerably more reliable.
 
Bayer said:
The ratio was slightly better at ROCP 1, but it was a disaster, so it depends on the quality of the elevators as well, and/or on the service contract. When I lived there, the building was brand new; yet the elevators at Manulife Centre, a much older building, are considerably more reliable.
Click to expand...
I'm not sure how long you were in ROCP, or what years my friends whom I visited fairly regularly there were in it (I'm bad with years)… but I'd be curious if there was a period of overlap. My friends were the second owners of their unit, and by the time I was visiting them there, I experienced no major problems with the elevators, so either I lucked out, or the elevators improved over time as problematic parts were replaced, software improved, etc.

There are so many factors that go into determining how many elevators will be needed for any tower, including how large each cab is, how fast, how reliable, how good the destination dispatch tech is, how many units/bedrooms per floor, how tall (and therefore how much time spent traveling more to get to the higher floors in the first place), etc, that it will take vertical transportation experts to create equations to figure out what an acceptable range of service should be before the City can issue guidelines...

…so I'm just using a round-figured threshold at the moment that's neither particularly well-informed nor, conversely, particularly in dispute. (There are others in the industry that have quoted 1 per 100 suites, and a older ratio was 1 per 90 that I was told about, so I'm just using the easiest to conceptualize number out there until there are better guidelines or formulas to apply...

…but yes, the elevator installations in any project would need to be of an average or better quality to perform at acceptable levels to satisfy any set of guidelines that may be established in the future. We just need to find out what average reliability is, and how all the other factors work together so that those living in high-rises won't be held hostage by the system while living in any building.

42
 
interchange42 said:
I'm not sure how long you were in ROCP, or what years my friends whom I visited fairly regularly there were in it (I'm bad with years)… but I'd be curious if there was a period of overlap. My friends were the second owners of their unit, and by the time I was visiting them there, I experienced no major problems with the elevators, so either I lucked out, or the elevators improved over time as problematic parts were replaced, software improved, etc.

There are so many factors that go into determining how many elevators will be needed for any tower, including how large each cab is, how fast, how reliable, how good the destination dispatch tech is, how many units/bedrooms per floor, how tall (and therefore how much time spent traveling more to get to the higher floors in the first place), etc, that it will take vertical transportation experts to create equations to figure out what an acceptable range of service should be before the City can issue guidelines...

…so I'm just using a round-figured threshold at the moment that's neither particularly well-informed nor, conversely, particularly in dispute. (There are others in the industry that have quoted 1 per 100 suites, and a older ratio was 1 per 90 that I was told about, so I'm just using the easiest to conceptualize number out there until there are better guidelines or formulas to apply...

…but yes, the elevator installations in any project would need to be of an average or better quality to perform at acceptable levels to satisfy any set of guidelines that may be established in the future. We just need to find out what average reliability is, and how all the other factors work together so that those living in high-rises won't be held hostage by the system while living in any building.

42
Click to expand...
I lived on the 50th floor of ROCP 1 for 10 years, between 2007 and 2017. The three high-floor elevators were rarely all working.
 
CBRE Listing this for Capital Developments as of June 29th 2023 - Quick Flip for them, likely after picking up 8 Elm last year.

Screenshot 2023-06-29 104900.png
 
I know blame can be directed at many stakeholders here… but Teeple seems to be a one-tower-wonder with only Picasso being notable. This is so dreadfully boring
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top