I find it odd it said 191 Dundas when it for the 2nd floor or part of the whole building and not 193. 197 should be part of it as well the building on the corner to the east.

It would end up having a better looking street level than the mess mass if it stay as plan.

As for parking, time to get rid of it or most of it, as this is the root of congestion in the first place. More so, city were built for people, not cars. It a short walk to DT and you have the 505 at your front door. Having Zip car or other share cars in the building is the way to go.
 
I'm at the public meeting for this right now, and there is a depudant to representing the grand hotel. She said they are considering redeveloping their site with 2 towers, one residential and one residential / hotel.
 
Just ended, but it was in ryersons international living centre residence in the conference room. (The residence is a converted hotel so it has a small conference room)
 
The meeting was good last night. I would say there was an above average amount of support for the proposal. Primary concerns were around the allegedly shady dealings of the developer with the existing rental/rooming house tenants on the property.
 
there were a couple of people who were very explicitly happy about it, specifically mentioning how they hope to make the corner safer for pedestrians, especially at night when there aren't many people around. One expressed support as it increased the supply of housing near campus for Ryerson Residents.

The strongest concerns with the development was with the lack of rental replacement housing. The site technically has 5 dwelling units on it currently (you technically need 6 to qualify for rental replacement), however they act as rooming houses which means that it houses a lot more than the average 5 apartment complex.
 
I'm not sure how student oriented it is going to be, given that it is over 50% (if I remember correctly) 2 and 3 bedrooms. Certainly there are others in the area (including I presume the new one at Dundas and Church) that will be more student oriented.
 
2 and 3 bedrooms are more affordable for students to rent, and share, vs. a bachelor or 1 bedroom. My building, which has become very popular with students in the past 6 or 7 years, has a wait list for 2 bedrooms, bachelors and one bedrooms sit empty.
 
Pre-emptively appealed to OMB because the owners of the Grand Hotel said they would appeal the tower if it was approved. Time saving measure, since it was going to the Board regardless (FYI).
 
dt_toronto_geek said:
2 and 3 bedrooms are more affordable for students to rent, and share, vs. a bachelor or 1 bedroom. My building, which has become very popular with students in the past 6 or 7 years, has a wait list for 2 bedrooms, bachelors and one bedrooms sit empty.
Click to expand...

so people are not happy whether it is all one bedroom, or contains many 2-3 bedrooms?

If it is mostly large units, and students, instead of "families" move in, that only shows that it is not that developers don't build family friendly condos, but that families are simply not interested in condos no matter what developers build, doesn't it?
 
ksun said:
so people are not happy whether it is all one bedroom, or contains many 2-3 bedrooms?

If it is mostly large units, and students, instead of "families" move in, that only shows that it is not that developers don't build family friendly condos, but that families are simply not interested in condos no matter what developers build, doesn't it?
Click to expand...

Or ksun, perhaps it's a mixture between a) the close proximity to two major educational institutions that don't have very much student dorms and b) Currently it's still a semi-sketchy area between street life, hookers and mentally ill people make me worried about tourists turning the wrong corner let alone a child coming home from school.
That being said, the hood is changing quickly and you will see a lot more young couples and families purchasing the many condo's coming to the area over the next decade. Across the city 3 bdm condo's are being swiped up almost immediately by families whether it's because of the price point or it's just convenient for their lifestyle.
You're just negative for the sake of being negative or the troll-iest version of the devil's advocate on here
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top