It still requires approval from City Council. After that, once they've got their permits, they're good to go whenever they want. I have not heard whether they are chomping at the bit, or if they have another timeline. Anyone got the inside scoop on that?

42
 
I don't know. I'm just curious why the perception persists that rentals are quicker to breaking ground than condos. There are dozens of approved rental high rises from the last fifteen years that have still to break ground. There have been exceptions during the big rental push over the year two years but, not all went straight from zoning to site plan to construction. Some were longer approved plans. There's also speculation that things will slow down this year not that I agree with it.

You don't need presale. It's 100% speculation. In normal times, that's much harder to arrange.
 
curiously, how's a rental development financially different from a normal condo development? The latter makes presale to 75%, and among other requirements, gets the construction loan at 70% of the cost, and then begin to dig. But a rental one would require much much more equity to get much less construction loan, I guess. Rental works in the heart of Yorkville, but seems not easy to get it ready. Hope it can take off.
 
June Moon said:
curiously, how's a rental development financially different from a normal condo development? The latter makes presale to 75%, and among other requirements, gets the construction loan at 70% of the cost, and then begin to dig. But a rental one would require much much more equity to get much less construction loan, I guess. Rental works in the heart of Yorkville, but seems not easy to get it ready. Hope it can take off.
Click to expand...

In a condo the construction is paid off in a lump sum at closing. In a rental it's a very long stream of rental income that is used to repay the construction cost.
 
The renders show this to-be-moved Victorian building painted white, as it mostly is now. But the peeling paint reveals nice red brick. I hope they restore to the original.

bayscollard_11283.jpg


bayscollard_21283.jpg
 

Attachments

  • bayscollard_11283.jpg
    bayscollard_11283.jpg
    206.5 KB · Views: 608
  • bayscollard_21283.jpg
    bayscollard_21283.jpg
    177.6 KB · Views: 607
111 said:
The renders show this to-be-moved Victorian building painted white, as it mostly is now. But the peeling paint reveals nice red brick. I hope they restore to the original.
Click to expand...

The preliminary conservation plan filed under the Site Plan Approval available from the Dev App site indicates the paint will be removed and the brickwork restored:

http://app.toronto.ca/DevelopmentAp...3858499&isCofASearch=false&isTlabSearch=false

upload_2017-10-12_20-38-26.png


upload_2017-10-12_20-38-42.png

(ERA Architects - Conservation Plan, p. 20-21)

There are some additional movements back in Sept 2017 as well.

AoD
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-10-12_20-38-26.png
    upload_2017-10-12_20-38-26.png
    29.3 KB · Views: 605
  • upload_2017-10-12_20-38-42.png
    upload_2017-10-12_20-38-42.png
    718.8 KB · Views: 611
Fenton and Lee-Chin confirm in that interview that they've bought the development, that it is indeed a condo, and that they are keeping the architect.
 
Has Lee-Chin actually given the ROM the money that he pledged to them to name the crystal after his mom?

42
 
So…

That story was from way back on November 28th, and we all missed it until now! Huh. Small viewership crossover between BNN and UT?

The database file has been updated to reflect the new ownership, but I haven't changed any stats yet, pending having a document to refer to, but Fenton referred to the building twice as being 42 storeys, not 43, and said 'about 180,000' sq ft of GFA. The last architectural plans submitted to the City have the residential GFA at 212,000 sq ft. Since the design is staying, (assuming so because they're keeping Foster and Fenton said "we're basically ready to go") then maybe more of the lower floors will be given over to commercial? They'll definitely be reworking the interiors entirely as Fenton was saying 80 to 90 suites planned, which contrasts with the 112 from the Site Plan Approval docs. They're going big units here, as they're also going expensive units here, Fenton saying they're aiming to sell them starting at about $2,500 a square foot.

I'm left to assume that The One must be selling just fine.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top