I like the ideas here, think it just needs a little refining. I like the height for this location as well. Hopefully it stays at 60s.

Glad to see some heritage preservation here, even if it's only facadism that's better than nothing. Are the interiors here anything noteworthy?

Definitely has some isses but it's a decent infill proposal.
 
MichaelZ said:
So? That sounds like a very convenient location for a certain segment of renters.
Click to expand...
It seemed you assumed it was in a high end area, but it's the opposite. The point being that nearly every market segment has an unreasonable amount of competition for units.
MichaelZ said:
Anyone paying above average rent will have landlords jumping to their feet whereas those paying below average are going to experience the opposite. That's how a market works whatever the vacancy rate is in any city. The average price is obviously affected by it with some lag.
Click to expand...
I think the point is the market is so unbalanced it's threating the socioeconomic stability of our society. This isn't something to mess around with. We've created a ticking time bomb under our society's relative stability and prosperity.
MichaelZ said:
Landlords also sometimes underprice their properties to attract bidding wars
Click to expand...
Detestable practice whether it's for rent or resale driven by perverse incentives enabled by crap government policy.
 
Undead said:
It seemed you assumed it was in a high end area, but it's the opposite. The point being that nearly every market segment has an unreasonable amount of competition for units.

I think the point is the market is so unbalanced it's threating the socioeconomic stability of our society. This isn't something to mess around with. We've created a ticking time bomb under our society's relative stability and prosperity.

Detestable practice whether it's for rent or resale driven by perverse incentives enabled by crap government policy.
Click to expand...
You need to reread my comment if that's what you think. As I only suggested possibilities. There's no way anyone can actually confirm if the specific example your thinking of is genuine without being a telepath.

And while you have some decent points you sidestep the central point with some emotive hyperbole instead of actually addressing it, namely that the market is what it is and everyone seeks to maximize their own profit to some degree.

For example, this 'ticking time bomb' language makes it seems as if Canadian society is so fragile the rental market in Toronto is all it takes to blow it up? If you believe society can truly be that easily destroyed why are you spending your time here on an Internet forum and not at city hall and Queen's park?

If you mean the attractiveness of living in Canada generally would be slightly reduced, and specifically in Toronto would be greatly reduced, if worse came to worse, sure that seems possible. There's after all no limitation on how much a city can increase or decrease in attractiveness.
 
Last edited:
TossYourJacket said:
Dismissing anything you don't agree with does not make for any sort of productive discussion, which you have been consistently doing in your replies.
Click to expand...
You seem to be dismissing my valid comment? Why is YorkU Village not an attractive location for anyone if you believe my comment was a dismissal?

Also I'm fairly certain I've been contributing to this discussion more than what you have so far... anyone can see for themselves and confirm whether anyone's arguments here have merit or not. Lazy blanket assertions usually are signs of weak attempts at deflection.
 
Last edited:
MichaelZ said:
There's no way anyone can actually confirm if the specific example your thinking of is genuine without being a telepath.
Click to expand...
This example occurred to my friend.

In any case, I think you're dismissing arguments and evidence without providing much in return.
MichaelZ said:
And while you have some decent points you sidestep the central point with some emotive hyperbole instead of actually addressing it, namely that the market is what it is and everyone seeks to maximize their own profit to some degree.

For example, this 'ticking time bomb' language makes it seems as if Canadian society is so fragile the rental market in Toronto is all it takes to blow it up? If you believe society can truly be that easily destroyed why are you spending your time here on an Internet forum and not at city hall and Queen's park?
Click to expand...
I think you're ignoring or choosing not to understand the arguments. This is not a productive exchange anymore.
 
Undead said:
This example occurred to my friend.

In any case, I think you're dismissing arguments and evidence without providing much in return.

I think you're ignoring or choosing not to understand the arguments. This is not a productive exchange anymore.
Click to expand...
So like I said it's not possible for anyone to confirm if your example is genuine or not. Isn’t this obvious for an internet forum were most folks don’t know each other personally?

At most we can assign a probability based on our own experiences, though I bet 10 different folks reading it would have 10 different probabilities for how true it is.

That’s me directly addressing one of your claims. I‘m confident that anyone reading this can see that.



And to be honest it’s a bit bizarre that you think I’m ‘ignoring or choosing not to understand’ when my last few questions are about as frank as straightforward as I’ve seen anyone write on urbantoronto.
 
Last edited:
MichaelZ said:
And to be honest it’s a bit bizarre that you think I’m ‘ignoring or choosing not to understand’ when my last few questions are about as frank as straightforward as I’ve seen anyone write on urbantoronto.
Click to expand...

Frank is ironically never straight-forward on this forum (he lives in Oakville anyway).

And frankly, your questions aren't anywhere near as straight-forward as the contributions of our wonderful photographers who slavishly document construction projects.

You might say they skip the questions and just provide the answers instead.
 
MichaelZ said:
So like I said its not possible for anyone to confirm if your example is genuine or not. Isn’t this obvious for an internet forum were most folks don’t know each other personally?

At most we can assign a probability based on our own experiences, though I bet 10 different folks reading it would have 10 different probabilities for how true it is.

That’s me directly addressing one of your claims. I‘m confident that anyone reading this can see that.
Click to expand...
3Dementia said:
Frank is ironically never straight-forward on this forum (he lives in Oakville anyway).

And frankly, your questions aren't anywhere near as straight-forward as the contributions of our wonderful photographers who slavishly document construction projects.

You might say they skip the questions and just provide the answers instead.
Click to expand...
I don't quite get the 'frank' joke, is this a well known poster that lives in Oakville?

If you don't think my questions are straightforward then you can just say that, although some with thin skins may need this kind of circumlocution, I think it should be obvious by now I'm not that sensitive.

Notice that I had to ask a question in this comment as I've not yet acquired mind-reading skills.
 
New look rendering:

Screenshot 120751.jpg
 
@MessiGoat sneaking in news but only providing the tease....... LOL

Here's the Cover Letter outlining the changes:

1688436048214.png



Here's the Material Board:

1688436160433.png



****

Back in the olden days, we didn't use to track elevators on applications, but since I had to look at the plans again.

0.7 elevators per 100 units for @interchange42 's records (708 units, 5 elevators)

Note, height is now listed as 61s on the plans.

1688436860475.png


Based on the stats we have now, the new floor is 0.6M high, and only John Malkovich will live there.
 
Also notable - this has only 7 visitor parking spaces at grade along the lane. No underground.

Regarding the extra floor when this has increased in height by only 0.6m (to 198.75m) - I notice that a lot of floors have shorter than normal 2.8 metre slab-to-slab heights (normal is 2.95m), so a lot of units here will have 8ft ceilings instead of the standard 8.5.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top