More brick cladding. I am thinking that in today’s zoning climate they could have gone twice the height. Taken 4 October.

IMG_4265.jpeg
 
Anybody know why they didn't go for more height with this infill? The existing site definitely sets... a precedent, and this is well within the MTSA of Spadina Station, as well as fronting onto an avenue. Considering the southern wall of the current building features no windows I am shocked they did not at least match the height of the existing tower.
 
jmi22 said:
Rent not being $3000 for a one bed is even better for the urban fabric, and the more we built the sooner that can be reality
Click to expand...
Don't act like the GTA isn't already a huge place with plenty more sites for redevelopment and housing. Not everyone has to live in the city core as well.
 
Riseth said:
Don't act like the GTA isn't already a huge place with plenty more sites for redevelopment and housing. Not everyone has to live in the city core as well.
Click to expand...
The problem is that people say this for every site. it doesn't matter if it's on top of a transit station or in the middle of suburbian there is always a fight to remove height and density.
 
The real problem is no amount of supply will catch up with the amount of demand our overlords keep pumping into the country. That's the real issue that many people ignore for reasons.
 
So very true!

There is one very simple solution to the skyrocketing rents that are pushing people to live in parks but other than Max Bernier, not one politician has the GUTS to discuss the solution. Not even the so-called "conservative" Pierre Poilievre.

$3,000 a month for a one-bedroom? When did Toronto become Manhattan?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top