artyboy123

artyboy123

Senior Member
Member Bio
Joined
Feb 1, 2021
Messages
2,009
Reaction score
6,075
Taken from DevApp:

" This project involves the redevelopment of the 15.64 acre site at 541 Kipling Ave in Etobicoke. An existing aged industrial facility is to be demolished (under a separate application) and will be replaced with a new single storey 337,210 sf industrial distribution facility."

DevApp Link: http://app.toronto.ca/AIC/index.do?folderRsn=3FkJ8EkhkyXA0TWrosfbvQ==

Photos taken from Architectural Plan:

PLN - Architectural Plans - MAY 4 2021-5.jpg


photo1-1024x588.jpeg


photo2-1024x588.jpeg
 
They just did roof replacement and some minor renovation work on the existing distribution centre a few years ago, I guess that money is going to waste.

I do like how the existing building is setback from Kipling providing for some nice open space. Looks like that's something we'll be losing out on here.
 
Amare said:
They just did roof replacement and some minor renovation work on the existing distribution centre a few years ago, I guess that money is going to waste.

I do like how the existing building is setback from Kipling providing for some nice open space. Looks like that's something we'll be losing out on here.
Click to expand...
Is the site currently a distribution center as of right now?
 
The site is currently operated by Metro Logistics, more so it looks to be a Logistics Centre with some Fulfillment/Warehousing:

Home

Metro Supply Chain designs, builds and runs innovative supply chain operations that evolve with business needs. Let us future proof your supply chain.
www.metroscg.com www.metroscg.com
 
This is an attractive, seemingly functional building. It seems environmentally dubious to tear it down to build a new building with a similar function and smaller square footage. If the site were being intensified, I might be supportive of the redevelopment, but I see nothing to be excited about with this project as it stands.
 
^Agreed it really doesn't make any sense to me why the existing facility is being razed, in favor of a facility which looks on paper to be capable of providing the exact same functionality. Not to mention the fact that the existing facility could probably be renovated further to accommodate anything that it isn't able to be used for at the moment. That's unless whoever the proponent is really needs all the excess loading dock space.

I'll also add that the lawn in front of the existing building is frequently used by geese in the warmer months, and it's not uncommon to see them cross Kipling to hang out on the lawn.
 
Ottawan said:
This is an attractive, seemingly functional building. It seems environmentally dubious to tear it down to build a new building with a similar function and smaller square footage. If the site were being intensified, I might be supportive of the redevelopment, but I see nothing to be excited about with this project as it stands.
Click to expand...
Amare said:
^Agreed it really doesn't make any sense to me why the existing facility is being razed, in favor of a facility which looks on paper to be capable of providing the exact same functionality. Not to mention the fact that the existing facility could probably be renovated further to accommodate anything that it isn't able to be used for at the moment. That's unless whoever the proponent is really needs all the excess loading dock space.

I'll also add that the lawn in front of the existing building is frequently used by geese in the warmer months, and it's not uncommon to see them cross Kipling to hang out on the lawn.
Click to expand...
I am no expert on the industrial space, but it is my understanding that while an industrial building structure itself may be relatively fine as it is, there are a lot of things that are not necessarily practical or cheap to retrofit.

The spacing of columns and aisles are huge factors for prospective tenants and might be unsuitable for a new tenant, or the concrete slab may not be able to support the weight of a new use, and probably another half dozen of technical reasons are driving the decision to demolish and rebuild instead of retrofit here. Given the scarcity of industrial land, escalating sqft (cubic foot?) industrial rent in the region, and low vacancy rates, the economics probably also make rebuild more desirable than a retrofit.
 
Was about to post that demolition has begun here. Well one thing is for certain here, the exterior of the building here was very sharp and the replacement building wont come close to matching it.
 
this is an odd project to me as the existing building is fairly large and doesn't seem particularly sub-standard, and the new building will basically be the same size. I wonder how the pro-forma is working out making it worth demolishing this to build new.
 
I'm thinking the redesign has the do with better accommodating trucks as it appears they will no longer be taking rail traffic, judging by how set back the building is from the rails and the number of truck bays added.
 
More equipment showing up, while the structure comes down at a quick rate. A look at the rail spur around back that has to be carefully worked around while taking down the rear walls. At night CN comes down this spur to serve what appears one last customer via the switch off to photo right in last photo.
DSC_7233.jpg
DSC_7231.jpg

DSC_7229.jpg

DSC_7230.jpg
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top