Amare

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 4, 2015
Messages
4,179
Reaction score
5,840
Looks amazing to me, love the podium and the cross-braced cladding. For the most part, i'm a fan of First Capital and their works as they tend to think outside of the standard boring Toronto box.
 

nika

New Member
Member Bio
Joined
Jun 5, 2021
Messages
4
Reaction score
4
Sorry but this is an uninspiring development compliments of First Capital of course. It's going to ruin the street scape of the Annex which made it such a special place for visitors and residents. . The main reason people come down here is because it's not wall to wall condos. The city has to demand more than faceless condos that are going to be snapped up by investors only to be rented out. No one is anti development we just want good city planning.
 

Northern Light

Superstar
Member Bio
Joined
May 20, 2007
Messages
16,611
Reaction score
35,490
Sorry but this is an uninspiring development compliments of First Capital of course. It's going to ruin the street scape of the Annex which made it such a special place for visitors and residents. . The main reason people come down here is because it's not wall to wall condos. The city has to demand more than faceless condos that are going to be snapped up by investors only to be rented out. No one is anti development we just want good city planning.

Everyone is entitled to their own perspective on aesthetics.

While UT'ers will vary; I think you'd find a relatively positive vibe about the tower here which has some warmer tones, and greater visual interest than most.
It's certainly not a plain box, for better or worse.

I think it would certainly be fair to question how the ground level is structured.
As yet, I'm not persuaded that the design is ideal from the perspective of retail animation.

*****

While some here would not agree, I do sympathize with the take than the Annex area, along Bloor, from Walmer to Front largely reads quite well.
It's a busy shopping area with a reasonably diverse mix of independent and chain retail, a decent little food scene, and yet meets the needs of locals as well.
I can understand a concern that that may be threatened by a proverbial wall of towers.

But I would suggest to you, that some degree of intensification is both desirable; and can be beneficial to the community.

That to the extent one wishes to strike a balance, the height should be focused near the major intersections (Subway Stations) at both Spadina and Bathurst; and the key is simply to do one's best as much as the planning process allows to ensure quality development, rather than opposing it outright.

I think you'll find that outright opposition won't be successful in any event, therefore, simply as a pragmatic choice, you'll better served to lobby for the best version of a tower, rather than none at all.
 

xy3

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 5, 2021
Messages
171
Reaction score
207
Sure, but let's run the numbers. Let's assume they buy a 600 sq.ft. 1+den or 2 bedroom at $1,400 psf (reasonable guestimate for a pre-con in this area). Assuming a 20% down payment puts the mortgage at 672k. Most banks will approve mortgages about 4x one's annual income. So the couple needs a combined income of 168k minimum. Two intermediate professionals/middle managers can afford that, but no way is a cleaner or food delivery worker making that much. And besides, most food delivery workers downtown are on bikes, not cars. Cleaners might be getting picked and brought to sites by their company. Most people living here will probably be professionals working downtown and taking the subway. If this site does need parking, the ratio should be no more than 0.1 spots/unit.
In reality , a large portion of people will use their parents inheritance for a 50-100% down payment which should bypass the income requirements.

Jobs that pay 70k plus will become more scarce in the future due to artificial intelligence absorbing white collar work and elite overproduction. Most 2nd/3rd generation Canadians will be earning considerably less money than their parents as far as purchasing/investing/saving power goes. The only real advantage some people will have is an inheritance.

More people will be working a lower paying job, some form of self employment, and/or gig work in the evening/weekend etc. More people will be joining the growing precariat class. Blue collar Self employed and Gig work almost always requires a car.

I see what you're saying but Id argue the model of cleaners being hired by a company is a dying business model; and it's usually has extremely limited earning potential compared to what a competent hard working self employed cleaner can make.

The other poster was correct that most of these people who are more financially constrained will buy in condos such as the West Mall Etobicoke. But having absolutely no parking is a way of subtly shutting gig workers out.
 
Last edited:

Undead

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
1,845
Reaction score
4,192
In reality , a large portion of people will use their parents inheritance for a 50-100% down payment which should bypass the income requirements.
Probably well under 50% with the average gift in Toronto being around 125k, but agreed in principle
Jobs that pay 70k plus will become more scarce in the future due to artificial intelligence absorbing white collar work.
Sure, agreed.

Although my thinking on this issue echoes David Graeber's concept of bullshit jobs.

I don't think 70k+ jobs will necessarily be scarce going forward. Companies will just invent new bullshit positions so that people have an income to consume the goods and services produced by said companies.

In fact, I would argue this already describes a significant portion of office work: fluffy workfare positions which enable continued consumer demand and prevent people going destitute.

My point being that there will be enough middle/upper middle class workers in the future to afford units in these areas. There won't be some surge in gig workers buying in these areas and needing parking spots. A really odd claim to make.
More people will be working a lower paying job and gig work in the evening/weekend etc. Gig work almost always requires a car.
Most people in gig work won't be buying here.

I'm not opposed to buildings having parking. But I think it's logical for one building right beside a subway station to have no parking.

It's perplexing seeing the odd objections advanced should one dare suggest a building in a super transit friendly location have no parking.
 
Last edited:

xy3

Active Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 5, 2021
Messages
171
Reaction score
207
Probably well under 50% with the average gift in Toronto being around 125k, but agreed in principle

Sure, agreed.

Although my thinking on this issue echoes David Graeber's concept of bullshit jobs.

I don't think 70k+ jobs will necessarily be scarce going forward. Companies will just invent new bullshit positions so that people have an income to consume the goods and services produced by said companies.

In fact, I would argue this already describes a significant portion of office work: fluffy workfare positions which enable continued consumer demand and prevent people going destitute.

My point being that there will be enough middle/upper middle class workers in the future to afford units in these areas. There won't be some surge in gig workers buying in these areas and needing parking spots. A really odd claim to make.

Most people in gig work won't be buying here.

I'm not opposed to buildings having parking. But I think it's logical for one building right beside a subway station to have no parking.

It's perplexing seeing the odd objections advanced should one dare suggest a building in a super transit friendly location have no parking.
.

I should have clarified that dont think there will be a surge of precariat buyers in this area and agree with you regarding downtown buildings on subway lines,,, but at the same time I dont think zero parking should become the 'new normal' for the inner suburbs of Toronto too. In fact I think they key to more affordable housing lies in areas like Rexdale . Affordable buildings should have ample parking.

Prime land in the downtown produces more property tax for city coffers if it caters to upper market. So encouraging zero parking and dependence on transit makes sense for the work-from-home laptop elite.

Usually gig workers deliver groceries and packages or whatnot to people who are working these cushy fluff laptop jobs from the comfort of their home. The more fluff jobs, the more demand for gig workers, generally speaking. The vast majority fluff positions are filled by internal hiring , regardless if the company posts an ad, so they are generally reserved for the well-connected of society .
 

Undead

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Sep 3, 2020
Messages
1,845
Reaction score
4,192
I should have clarified that dont think there will be a surge of precariat buyers in this area and agree with you regarding downtown buildings on subway lines,,, but at the same time I dont think zero parking should become the 'new normal' for the inner suburbs of Toronto too. In fact I think they key to more affordable housing lies in areas like Rexdale . Affordable buildings should have ample parking.

Prime land in the downtown produces more property tax for city coffers if it caters to upper market. So encouraging zero parking and dependence on transit makes sense for the work-from-home laptop elite.

Usually gig workers deliver groceries and packages or whatnot to people who are working these cushy fluff laptop jobs from the comfort of their home. The more fluff jobs, the more demand for gig workers, generally speaking. The vast majority fluff positions are filled by internal hiring , regardless if the company posts an ad, so they are generally reserved for the well-connected of society .
When you put it that way, agreed!
 

UtakataNoAnnex

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
3,072
Reaction score
3,758
My neighbourhood is starting to look a little more obelisk... 🙀
 

dowlingm

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
May 8, 2007
Messages
3,807
Reaction score
1,643
Four pages and roughly two of them are posts about how this one building (adjoining a transit station on two lines AND a streetcar loop!) must meet every whim of affordability for all demographics and demand for parking. Is there not a general airing of grievances page those could move to? While parking provision may become an issue in downtown generally as more parking lots are developed, the cost of underground parking is also a noted driver of higher construction budgets and thus not necessarily promoting affordability.

As for the Annex being a special place... well. I guess for some definitions of special that may be the case.

Returning to the topic at hand, I note the picture showing the entrance to the aforementioned streetcar loop, which foreshortening may be making it seem like the building is closer to the tunnel entrance than it is. Is it fair to say the foundations of this don't impinge on that tunnel at all, or accesses between different parts of Spadina Station?

This development feels like it might have been more useful, given the short block and constraint of the station behind, as an assembly to the two sites to make best use of service/parking entrances etc., maybe even extend the parkette to the northeast towards Bloor a touch, or at least adjoin it with a POPS.
 

UtakataNoAnnex

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Mar 5, 2020
Messages
3,072
Reaction score
3,758
What I am about to say is likely considered "design incorrect". But I think we can still have that building and the heritage structure it's planning to replace. Because isn't the way that exo-skeleton of sorts is patterned after that motif of sorts of the existing building that houses Noah's, et al? It sorta reminds of that somehow. Scotia Bank and Pizza Pizza then can then have a shiny new glass lobby to operate out of. But I digress...

...I can't see why these two building elements can't work together without really compromising the current proposed design for this tower. I would argue its looks more janky and out of place without that heritage portion, IMO.
 

Top