H
Hydrogen
Guest
^You know the condo boom is hot if the Amish are checking things out.
junctionist
Senior Member
Their backup plan is to build a convent.
AlvinofDiaspar
Moderator
From the Globe Real Estate Section, by JBM:
DEVELOPMENT
John Bentley Mays
Going to battle against conventional taste
JOHN BENTLEY MAYS
From Friday's Globe and Mail
February 8, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST
Of the several condominium schemes I wrote up last year, none was more exciting than N-Blox.
This striking six-storey building was designed for a site in Toronto's Little Italy by Roland Rom Colthoff and Richard Witt, then with Quadrangle Architects. (They've since gone out on their own.) It had a handsome façade: a dramatically asymmetrical composition that expressed the interlocking and overhanging units within. But the best things about it were the units themselves: house-sized apartments, with prices to match ($700,000 to $1.5-million), pitched to deep-dyed downtowers.
Hearing nothing more about N-Blox after I did the column about it, I began to wonder what happened to the project. So, last week, I dropped by the downtown office of its developer, Jim Neilas, 37, to find out. The story he told me says a lot — alas! — about the readiness of Toronto condo buyers to embrace advanced architecture and family-sized apartments.
"We cancelled N-Blox almost immediately after the launch," Mr. Neilas said. "What we found out was that people will pay a slight premium for architecture, but they won't pay a hefty premium. They certainly won't pay 50 per cent above what a cookie-cutter condo would go for."
The site slated for N-Blox is now to be occupied by a building with smaller units called Cube.
"We tried to keep the look, feel and spirit of N-Blox, but in terms of its guts, Cube is pretty conventional. And sales have gone incredibly well. It sold out in two hours."
But does the failure of N-Blox suggest there's no future for new family-sized suites in this town?
"They're going to keep going. People are looking at apartments as a preference, as opposed to being Plan B — 'I can't afford a home, so I'll take an apartment.' I don't think we're there any more. I think we'll see more and more large apartments being sold."
It would be premature to call Mr. Neilas a visionary: He's still relatively new to the real estate game, having forsaken a career as a lawyer. But he is definitely thinking beyond the ordinary, and bucking the conventional wisdom of his industry.
Take, for example, the common view that nobody who can afford to do otherwise would want to live over a store on a busy street.
In a new project now under way in Little Italy, Mr. Neilas plans to prove the skeptics wrong.
"On College Street, you have typical three-storey, mixed-use properties, one after the other. My idea is to take one of them, put $2.5-million into it, gut it, put a different skin on it, add another floor on top. And there you have it: this beautiful steel and glass building with a 4,000- to 5,000-square-foot house above the store, with a pool and sheer luxury. Where else could you get 5,000 [residential] square feet? Forest Hill and Rosedale. But that's about $7-million, not $2.5-million. It's for a buyer who wants the area, who wants to see a lively street and make a statement about where he lives. I think we're there."
At the same time that he is trying to overcome market resistance to his new, architecturally challenging products, Mr. Neilas has been meeting opposition from another source: city planners and community groups now working to keep Queen Street the funky, low-rise avenue it's long been.
"They have this obsession with height. I wanted to put up six or seven storeys in Leslieville, on Queen Street East — some stunning architecture, really cool stuff. But when I tried to move on it, [the planners] would only allow five storeys. If I'd said I was going to do a five-storey strip joint, they would have said: 'Okay! So long as it's five storeys!' How is that good planning?"
As Mr. Neilas sees it, popular antagonism to higher density downtown is bound to backfire.
"Queen Street has become a museum. They say Queen is special! It may be where the Drake Hotel is [on Queen Street West], but over here in Leslieville, it's a rat-hole. We've got ugly, terrible mechanics' shops. Preserving everything does nothing for anyone."
His ire extends to the people who are attempting to keep high-rise development out of the Annex and other downtown neighbourhoods.
"I'm tired of being hit over the head with the bible of Jane Jacobs. Of course, there were a lot of things she picked up on, things worth preserving. But we're growing fast. We have to push the envelope. You can't replicate little Annex-type villages over and over again.
"Someone should bring a class-action lawsuit against the groups that are fighting density and height, on the grounds of environmental damage. Thousands of acres [in suburbia] are being swallowed up and made into ugly homes. The damage we're causing by going out instead of up!"
As he forges into these and other battles, Mr. Neilas seems ready for the fight up ahead. "I'm young," he told me, "and I've got the stomach for it."
_________________________________________________________________
While I deplore the more extreme cases of NIMBYism on the grounds of density and height, this stance is equally ridiculous, if one goes on the basis of environmental damage.
AoD
DEVELOPMENT
John Bentley Mays
Going to battle against conventional taste
JOHN BENTLEY MAYS
From Friday's Globe and Mail
February 8, 2008 at 12:00 AM EST
Of the several condominium schemes I wrote up last year, none was more exciting than N-Blox.
This striking six-storey building was designed for a site in Toronto's Little Italy by Roland Rom Colthoff and Richard Witt, then with Quadrangle Architects. (They've since gone out on their own.) It had a handsome façade: a dramatically asymmetrical composition that expressed the interlocking and overhanging units within. But the best things about it were the units themselves: house-sized apartments, with prices to match ($700,000 to $1.5-million), pitched to deep-dyed downtowers.
Hearing nothing more about N-Blox after I did the column about it, I began to wonder what happened to the project. So, last week, I dropped by the downtown office of its developer, Jim Neilas, 37, to find out. The story he told me says a lot — alas! — about the readiness of Toronto condo buyers to embrace advanced architecture and family-sized apartments.
"We cancelled N-Blox almost immediately after the launch," Mr. Neilas said. "What we found out was that people will pay a slight premium for architecture, but they won't pay a hefty premium. They certainly won't pay 50 per cent above what a cookie-cutter condo would go for."
The site slated for N-Blox is now to be occupied by a building with smaller units called Cube.
"We tried to keep the look, feel and spirit of N-Blox, but in terms of its guts, Cube is pretty conventional. And sales have gone incredibly well. It sold out in two hours."
But does the failure of N-Blox suggest there's no future for new family-sized suites in this town?
"They're going to keep going. People are looking at apartments as a preference, as opposed to being Plan B — 'I can't afford a home, so I'll take an apartment.' I don't think we're there any more. I think we'll see more and more large apartments being sold."
It would be premature to call Mr. Neilas a visionary: He's still relatively new to the real estate game, having forsaken a career as a lawyer. But he is definitely thinking beyond the ordinary, and bucking the conventional wisdom of his industry.
Take, for example, the common view that nobody who can afford to do otherwise would want to live over a store on a busy street.
In a new project now under way in Little Italy, Mr. Neilas plans to prove the skeptics wrong.
"On College Street, you have typical three-storey, mixed-use properties, one after the other. My idea is to take one of them, put $2.5-million into it, gut it, put a different skin on it, add another floor on top. And there you have it: this beautiful steel and glass building with a 4,000- to 5,000-square-foot house above the store, with a pool and sheer luxury. Where else could you get 5,000 [residential] square feet? Forest Hill and Rosedale. But that's about $7-million, not $2.5-million. It's for a buyer who wants the area, who wants to see a lively street and make a statement about where he lives. I think we're there."
At the same time that he is trying to overcome market resistance to his new, architecturally challenging products, Mr. Neilas has been meeting opposition from another source: city planners and community groups now working to keep Queen Street the funky, low-rise avenue it's long been.
"They have this obsession with height. I wanted to put up six or seven storeys in Leslieville, on Queen Street East — some stunning architecture, really cool stuff. But when I tried to move on it, [the planners] would only allow five storeys. If I'd said I was going to do a five-storey strip joint, they would have said: 'Okay! So long as it's five storeys!' How is that good planning?"
As Mr. Neilas sees it, popular antagonism to higher density downtown is bound to backfire.
"Queen Street has become a museum. They say Queen is special! It may be where the Drake Hotel is [on Queen Street West], but over here in Leslieville, it's a rat-hole. We've got ugly, terrible mechanics' shops. Preserving everything does nothing for anyone."
His ire extends to the people who are attempting to keep high-rise development out of the Annex and other downtown neighbourhoods.
"I'm tired of being hit over the head with the bible of Jane Jacobs. Of course, there were a lot of things she picked up on, things worth preserving. But we're growing fast. We have to push the envelope. You can't replicate little Annex-type villages over and over again.
"Someone should bring a class-action lawsuit against the groups that are fighting density and height, on the grounds of environmental damage. Thousands of acres [in suburbia] are being swallowed up and made into ugly homes. The damage we're causing by going out instead of up!"
As he forges into these and other battles, Mr. Neilas seems ready for the fight up ahead. "I'm young," he told me, "and I've got the stomach for it."
_________________________________________________________________
While I deplore the more extreme cases of NIMBYism on the grounds of density and height, this stance is equally ridiculous, if one goes on the basis of environmental damage.
AoD
Hipster Duck
Senior Member
Yeah, I thought class action lawsuits were for things like sexual harassment in the workplace, et. Al
also:
Mr. Neilas sounds less like a visionary and more like a massive douche.
also:
Mr. Neilas sounds less like a visionary and more like a massive douche.
junctionist
Senior Member
He mentions that "thousands of acres are being swallowed up and made into ugly homes", but it's families that can't afford a home with enough room in Toronto that are buying outside of the 416 in large numbers. These high end condos won't help them. He talks about density, but a midrise condo of 5000 square foot units doesn't do that much for density.
I have so much admiration for the concept of larger, midrise condos along major streets with more attention to the architecture. The visionary would bring more affordable condos of similar caliber with units in the $400,000 range. The are many streets in Toronto where he could develop an entire strip without having to worry about preservation.
I have so much admiration for the concept of larger, midrise condos along major streets with more attention to the architecture. The visionary would bring more affordable condos of similar caliber with units in the $400,000 range. The are many streets in Toronto where he could develop an entire strip without having to worry about preservation.
adma
Superstar
Besides, how many "ugly, terrible mechanics' shops" are there in the Annex? (And who's to say they won't get redeveloped, either?)
Kind of a Reggie Mantle to Harry Stinson's Jughead Jones...
Kind of a Reggie Mantle to Harry Stinson's Jughead Jones...
cruzin4u
Senior Member
Am I the only one who watched 'Big City Broker' last night?
Cube was all over the show. They sold all the units, except 1 on the opening day. Everyone was happy *cheers*!
Cube was all over the show. They sold all the units, except 1 on the opening day. Everyone was happy *cheers*!
UrbanAffair
Senior Member
hahahha thats so funny, i was actually on that show on one episode. Pretty funny, it was 2 summers ago when I was looking for a place that they were filming me. Guess its cool to know others watched the show...lol
Roundabout
Senior Member
799/801 College St demolition application
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2008/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-14233.pdf
http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/mmis/2008/te/bgrd/backgroundfile-14233.pdf
UrbanSustainability
New Member
Funny you mentioned...
I was the guy on the show that didn't end up purchasing a unit.
They changed the layout last minute, which removed all windows and the balcony on the West Facing wall. However, they painted me out as an 'investor' and not an 'end-user', to save some face!!!
I still really like the Cube Lofts and feel they will add a lot to the College/Oss area.
I was the guy on the show that didn't end up purchasing a unit.
They changed the layout last minute, which removed all windows and the balcony on the West Facing wall. However, they painted me out as an 'investor' and not an 'end-user', to save some face!!!
I still really like the Cube Lofts and feel they will add a lot to the College/Oss area.
Andrew3D
Active Member
Prep work on the site has begun.
urbandreamer
recession proof
Old building has been torn down for some time now, wonder how long this thing will take to build?
current
Active Member
March 31
Work has begun, looking southeast.
Looking southwest.
Work has begun, looking southeast.
Looking southwest.
khris
Senior Member
Jeez, about time!
urbandreamer
recession proof
24 April 2009 photo update
Further west along College I saw another development proposal (townies) that's supposedly opening soon:
Now while it's good to see this eyesore dealership go, I wonder if the proposal will be done properly (like Cube) or will be fugly like those inappropriate Ossington Avenue townhouses across the street from Ideal Coffee?
Further west along College I saw another development proposal (townies) that's supposedly opening soon:
Now while it's good to see this eyesore dealership go, I wonder if the proposal will be done properly (like Cube) or will be fugly like those inappropriate Ossington Avenue townhouses across the street from Ideal Coffee?
Last edited: