ptbotrmpfn said:
Don't think we'll see any of these designs actually built those of us who have seen the designs will be long dead if the are ever to see the light of approval
Click to expand...

The heights are approved for this location, so who is to say that Mirvish doesn't turn around and sell it to another developer?
Say the Greenland Group, they have the bucks and are known to purchase already approved developments,
gee, they might even go with the Gehry plan
 
All we know is there don't seem to be any insiders, of whom there should be many, who has said anything on this thread. That is unusual.
 
Gehry and knocking 30 floors off the top would do a lot to peak more interests from other parties if Mirvish were even willing to give up any part of this project.
 
To a developer?

I think they will appreciate the 2 million square feet of approved density more than the height and Gehry design. 60 storeys with as much density as they can cram in is much more attractive.
 
The Gehry design would help sales, as long as the units weren't priced significantly higher than other buildings in the area. The project would appear a better value than other towers in the area because purchasers would live in a building that everyone would know and love. Taller towers mean potentially better views for purchasers. The Absolute towers in Mississauga sold quickly, despite being more than a 100 storeys in total with an unusual design in the middle of suburbia.
 
Preselling is not really that big of a deal in Toronto. Absolute is still two towers and you can't compared their combined height and footage (regardless if they were sold and built simultaneously) to one of the planned 90 storey , Gehry towers from an investors point of view.
 
maestro said:
Preselling is not really that big of a deal in Toronto. Absolute is still two towers and you can't compared their combined height and footage (regardless if they were sold and built simultaneously) to one of the planned 90 storey , Gehry towers from an investors point of view.
Click to expand...

What are the problems from an investor's point of view?
 
In the most simplest terms, it costs more and takes more time to build. It takes a larger commitment to this one project for a real estate growth fund.

These towers have been approved for a number of years. They are grounds for other developers to use as a precedence for taller, slimmer tower but instead they continue to cram more and more densities within the establish height envelope. Planners certainly aren't fans of the high coverage and minimal setbacks.
 
maestro said:
In the most simplest terms, it costs more and takes more time to build. It takes a larger commitment to this one project for a real estate growth fund.

These towers have been approved for a number of years. They are grounds for other developers to use as a precedence for taller, slimmer tower but instead they continue to cram more and more densities within the establish height envelope. Planners certainly aren't fans of the high coverage and minimal setbacks.
Click to expand...

Wasn't the site plan approved just months ago?
 
Instead of building two large building. Could they build one wider super tall of a height of 1200 for eg. To curb the construction cost ?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top