interchange42 said:
The middle tower is subtly taller than the other two as already planned… The order of height from west to east is 82, 86, 84 storeys. That sounds like what you're suggesting already. Maybe you're talking about 80, 88, 84, or 81, 87, 84… but any aesthetic judgement on the benefits of staggering the heights more than they are now will be subjective to the person considering it. Any reason to object in terms of approvals would have to come based on the length of shadows or other quantifiable facets of the proposal.

42
Click to expand...

Just remember that no matter what heights the city eventually signs off on, the reality is that they'll be as high as sales and the housing market permit.

With all these potential 80s+ behemoths hitting the market at the same time -- not just with this development, but elsewhere as well -- I find it difficult to see them all being built to spec. I can see M&G maybe getting one built that high, but not three. Subtract 10-12s on each of them, however, and it becomes much easier to picture shovels hitting the ground in a hurry.

And such a reduction could also be implemented without detracting from the sense of majesty they need to evoke in order to be iconic.
 
Perhaps a solution for the city is to make height something a developer can "purchase" - either with extended development fees or with parks, museums and educational facilities. Then the "precedent" for height won't be so difficult to swallow if each developer has to pay some "fee" like Mirvish is proposing.

Perhaps they have to provide a cultural or community facility or substantial contribution to the DRL.
 
They do that informally already with Section 37 benefit bargaining. There is significant resistance to formalizing it, however, as planners and councillors prefer to look at projects on a case by case basis because the context for each one varies so much. Getting agreement on a formula to suit the purchase of extra floors across the city would be next to impossible.

42
 
interchange42 said:
They do that informally already with Section 37 benefit bargaining. There is significant resistance to formalizing it, however, as planners and councillors prefer to look at projects on a case by case basis because the context for each one varies so much.
Click to expand...

The city would never be able to formalize a process, but it is needed. I would not be surprised if the province took the lead on changing the Section 37 process in the near future: http://www.mah.gov.on.ca/Page10355.aspx
 
Given the architect and the high profile of the project I wouldn't be surprised if they were snapped up quite quickly. I also have a feeling that Mervish won't compromise Gehry's design, and will hold out on building each tower until it can go up as envisioned. Mervish does not come across as a standard Toronto condo developer.
 
Last edited:
^You might be right but I'm actually curious what kind of dollar value bump famous architects yield for residential units now and how that value depreciates over time. I guess we don't have as much experience with this in Toronto vis a vis some other major North American cities.
 
TrickyRicky said:
^You might be right but I'm actually curious what kind of dollar value bump famous architects yield for residential units now and how that value depreciates over time. I guess we don't have as much experience with this in Toronto vis a vis some other major North American cities.
Click to expand...

I think what I've read previously indicated that the height they wanted was to maintain the affordability of the units more than anything. I don't think they intend for these to be 2700 luxury units.
 
TrickyRicky said:
^You might be right but I'm actually curious what kind of dollar value bump famous architects yield for residential units now and how that value depreciates over time. I guess we don't have as much experience with this in Toronto vis a vis some other major North American cities.
Click to expand...

When I spoke with David Mirvish last fall he said these would be priced at about $100/sq ft premium over what is currently on the market. I do think there is some retained value, especially with a project like this one.
 
I haven't seen the shadow studies but, it has been brought up in the process as a major concern.

Presales only take you so far. Lenders aren't exactly throwing hundreds of millions of dollars at developers for selling a bunch of units without a massive portfolio to back them up. The risk with Gehry's reputation for cost overruns will also be a serious detriment to project financing.

His contributions to the arts are beside the point. This is a real estate development first and foremost and Mirvish has shown to only flip his real estate holdings. I don't really see anything different here. Also, even if he recouped the full 100 million from the sale of the landmark store, it's a drop in the bucket for the funds needed. Saying he has rich friends doesn't mean a thing. In fact, in my experience, friends are unlikely to be silent financial partners.

freshcutgrass said:
So what is the ulterior motive then? If anyone has an impeccable record for 50 years as patron of the arts in Toronto, it's him. What more does the guy have to do to prove himself????? I can't imagine another person with as much wherewithal to pull off such a project )or even come up with it).





Unless you are his personal financial advisor, I have no idea where you are coming from with such an outrageous statement.

I too question the viability of this project, as it is ambitious. But I've learned that the Toronto condo market is capable of some pretty impressive feats. The condos will get financed the same way all of them are...pre sales (or they won't...simple as that). The non-condo elements could be self-financed by Mirvish himself if he so wished. Although I assume he could finance quite easily. I'd bis assets and financing capabilities are enough to make the project viable financially. That $100 million he got from the old store site will come in handy. Don't forget besides massive real estate assets, he has an important art collection that could itself be worth a $billion.

And who says he's necessarily going to go it alone...it's not like he doesn't have a lot of wealthy friends in high places.




Shadows on what....the fire station??? Who is going to complain about shadows?
Click to expand...
 
When I spoke with David Mirvish last fall he said these would be priced at about $100/sq ft premium over what is currently on the market.
Click to expand...

$100/sqft seems like chump change in terms of Gehry buildings. Not that it's a fair comparison, but his Opus condo building in HK had construction costs of $3500/sqft and sales topping $9000/sqft.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top