Tulse said:
If this approach is economical here, I don't understand why it isn't used more with other projects in the city. What is unique about this project that makes it appropriate here?
Click to expand...

Well it is riskier and more costly than a run-of-the-mill project, so those factors alone winnow down the number of developers willing to take a chance on such a thing.
 
Right, but if it's more expensive, what makes it economical here, as opposed to other locations? Why was doing this better than building at a different unoccupied location, or tearing down the existing building here and starting completely fresh?
 
Pure speculation, but I assume this made sense here because the condition of the old building was such that a retrofit was a cost-effective way of bringing it up to modern office standards. Often tear-downs are done where a structure has irredeemable issues.

Also, this was a rather large building already, so the cost of tearing it down and reconstructing, balanced against this approach made the innovative approach cost-effective.

Another factor simply could be that this sort of project hadn't been done that much in Toronto, so it took some innovation to come up with the solution. If this project works out and proves lucrative, we may see other similar ones in the future.
 
As the owner of an older building here, you know you need to upgrade the office space to keep your tenants. You know the site is worth more than what's on it now, so you hatch a plan to keep your tenants while making the most out of the air above it.

Being that you're right at a subway station, you know that the City will be sympathetic to more density. You also know that you'll be able to charge more per square foot because of the location location location, so you go to the City with a bold proposal that maxes out the possibilities here. It will be expensive to build above what's there now, but if you can build high enough over the current building, you can spread the cost of the beefed up structure you'll need over many suites.

This plan likely wouldn't work at too many sites in Toronto, but I imagine this won't be the last time we see something like this happen: it will likely remain an uncommon solution.

42
 
After looking at the pics of this development, I have a question.........does anyone have a spare cap because I'd like to puke in it.
 
ssiguy2 said:
After looking at the pics of this development, I have a question.........does anyone have a spare cap because I'd like to puke in it.
Click to expand...
Just curious... what is the source of your 'sickness' - the aesthetics of the building, the engineering design or something else??
 
so far it's pretty cool in person. The glass is really nice, the fins are quite dramatic from certain places, and the diamond grid of the braces are very apparent. So far so good.
 
The cause of my affliction is how gaud awful the 2 sections have been put together, neither of the section have any architectural merit, it's yet another glass box, and doesn't fit at all well in with the other more non-glass buildings on Toronto's most beautiful and grand street. It's an ugly building on top of another one that, unfortunately, sticks out on such a lovely street. There is a place for everything and another glass box stuck on University is not the place it should be. Build a ugly non-descript building like this in City Place or Southcore where it's unsightly looks and lack of architecture would fit in beautiful with the rest of banality.
 
I think this already looks much better than any thing in CityPlace and maybe u could say this building is a bland glass box but I think it's clean sharp and from an engineering point of view a very interesting building.
 
ssiguy2 said:
The cause of my affliction is how gaud awful the 2 sections have been put together, neither of the section have any architectural merit, it's yet another glass box, and doesn't fit at all well in with the other more non-glass buildings on Toronto's most beautiful and grand street. It's an ugly building on top of another one that, unfortunately, sticks out on such a lovely street. There is a place for everything and another glass box stuck on University is not the place it should be. Build a ugly non-descript building like this in City Place or Southcore where it's unsightly looks and lack of architecture would fit in beautiful with the rest of banality.
Click to expand...

Legitimate question: Have you actually seen the building in-person?
 
Today:

image.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    2 MB · Views: 407
Tulse said:
If this approach is economical here, I don't understand why it isn't used more with other projects in the city. What is unique about this project that makes it appropriate here?
Click to expand...

Maybe we will start seeing more of this type of thing. As low hanging fruit becomes scarcer developers will start turning to options like this. It's not even the first building on this street that got additional floors added. Didn't one of those hospitals add some floors later on?
 
It looks great in person. It's coming along far better than I had expected. I think it's going to be a handsome addition to University Avenue - not a classic, certainly, but a looker all the same.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top