^that's what people like to do, find faults in good things.
 
Christopher Brown said:
I'd bet the folks who have been enjoying views of downtown from their north facing suites for the last couple of years aren't so happy with the view today. Course, they won't need cable in the future. They'll be able to watch the tv of their new neighbors once this tower occupies.
Click to expand...
I'm sure they are very happy living right DT on the lake and Goodman Trail with everything at their fingertips, and also enjoying the +$100K in profit I imagine they're sitting on. This area has a ton of potential and anyone who got into this development early should be proud.

Personally, I'd rather live in a luxury unit on the lake without a view, steps to the PATH, a 5 min walk to the financial district (for work) vs. a place at Yonge/Eg with a view in an average condo with 500 units.

As other UT members mentioned, the plan for the block was clearly communicated to all buyers, especially those who decided to purchase units facing north.
 
Is it due to this project was designed/approved prior to the new condo insulation rule that still allowed them to use the expansive wrap around wall to ceiling glass walls? Daniels Waterfront on the other hand had to put in those spandrel to meet regulation (as opposed to use better insulating glass?)

I lived in two separate building by these developers and they cut corners everywhere, highly doubt they put in high quality glass to meet the new insulation rule.
 
WeirdFishes said:
I'm sure they are very happy living right DT on the lake and Goodman Trail with everything at their fingertips, and also enjoying the +$100K in profit I imagine they're sitting on. This area has a ton of potential and anyone who got into this development early should be proud.

Personally, I'd rather live in a luxury unit on the lake without a view, steps to the PATH, a 5 min walk to the financial district (for work) vs. a place at Yonge/Eg with a view in an average condo with 500 units.

As other UT members mentioned, the plan for the block was clearly communicated to all buyers, especially those who decided to purchase units facing north.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't use the word "luxury".
 
TheKingEast said:
I wouldn't use the word "luxury".
Click to expand...
Great point. You are totally right, it is very subjective. However I agree that this building is more finished than most. When I see a mid-rise build with 10' ceilings, at the waterfront, with outdoor and indoor pools, and a higher standard of finishes, larger units, I think luxury. Especially when comparing it to other "luxury" buildings like Bisha, etc.
 
20 of 35 floors. Today.
838146DE-4B32-43D5-9A36-953D3B299E91.jpeg
227E87CF-3369-4306-92A7-24B8BA301D02.jpeg
 
That's really interesting. Why would Cityzen sell the land? I was thinking that the next phase was going to be a big pay-off because they didn't need to dig down any more (the space under both lots is already parking lots) so it'd be a pretty cheap build (while still selling the units at 1000-1200sq/ft, based on the other preconstruction units in the area).

Could a new developer come in and re-zone it, or do they have to follow through with the site plan approval? I'm speculating, but (after some reading) perhaps it has to do with the new tower separation guidelines that require towers (defined as buildings higher than 24m, all buildings on this site are) to be separated by 25m minimum. The previous site plan approval I believe called for the buildings to be separated by less than that. It doesn't apply to building permits issued before October 4, 2016, which is why I presume Pier 27 Tower was allowed to break the 25m separation rule. If so, I'm not sure anything could be built on these lots given how close the existing buildings are (or at least not anything taller than 24m). Which would be fine by me - they'd make a great park or restaurant, and which would retain the ability to view the 'blocks" on top from the street.

Any chance you could post a picture of the ad?
 
I hope whoever buys that piece of land builds something nice and taller.
 
ushahid said:
I hope whoever buys that piece of land builds something nice and taller.
Click to expand...
It's being advertised as Site Plan Approved and shovel ready, and is probably priced to reflect that. Nobody is going to build taller if it lowers profit margins
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top