I want to see Toronto take more risks - taller and less straight. Most buildings are still straight glass condo. I sed New York and Chicago building less but qualities are better.
@@Precondo yeah love them both! they will really add to the skyline positively and are both currently under construction. Really hoping the one gets the extra floors it would make it even more breathtaking upon completion.
the anti condo/ high rise people are annoying af!.... its a CITY, what do you expect!! them to waste land space and build a park or a town house ?? you've got to utilize the space completely!!! so i say bring on the high rises!! make them taller so toronto can have more tourist attractions they make the city / skyline look beautiful
If one thing holds Toronto back from moving up to an Alpha city, it is the Torontonians that fight everything and complain about everything. There seems to be a strong streak of insecurity and fear of greatness.
Great content, appreciate the hard work! I would love to see some analysis of previous major projects in the city for lessons that can be learned going forward.
Man has been intrigued by tall structures for millennia. Think "The Hanging Gardens of Babylon" at 80 feet built circa 605 BC, and "The Lighthouse of Alexandria" 246 BC and almost 400 feet tall. Jordon would have been a curious little Babylonian if he had lived back then, as would I. Love your website Jordan. I look forward to an update.
I'm in Atlanta but I spent a lot of summers in Toronto (North York) in the 80's and 90's because I have a lot of relatives there. One thing I've seen in Toronto is the massive number of residential projects all around the metro area. This is also happening in Atlanta. But is there enough office space in downtown Toronto for the massive growth of the metro area? I do realize that Covid sent a lot of workers home where many now want to continue to work from.
many of those lazy POS's want to continue working from home. I find it remarkable that any office projects are continuing to go ahead. last I checked there was about 8% vacancy rate downtown and 12-20% vacancy in the suburbs.
Cool comparison. Do you know why the city and developers are never fully aligned with approvals? How is it that a developer can get approval for a certain height then seek for higher at a later time? Why didn't they just approve them for what they want in the first place?
that's a good question, but a little above my pay grade if you look through development proposals you'll often notice density gets chiselled down by the city before final site plan approval - so it's my view from speaking to some developers about this, they'll often ask for more density then they know they're going to get as a general rule of thumb, the lower the density, the harder it is to achieve target profit margins on a site, so they always aim high, even if above the density precedent in the neighbourhood plan in many instances
@@PrecondoThanks. I see that all the time. Developers always shoot for the stars when it comes to overall height and number of storeys. But often times, when they are realistic with their height, the city usually almost approves it only with minor cosmetic changes. I think at the end of the day, it comes down to how much taxes and revenue it can generate for them. 🤦♂️
Are all these projects actually approved/confirmed to be constructed? I thought some of them were still awaiting approval. Or maybe you are guessing that they will be approved?
This is very personal but every one of these buildings better have overhangs on ground level. It's so annoying that architecture in ontario ignores ppl walking and looking up from the streets
fair but some of the projects here actually have really good street level design - and if you look into the architectural plans you'll see some put lots of thought into the pedestrian + retail experience
@@Precondo I see what you mean, but none of them have overhangs. If you look into the architectural elevations you won't see overhangs or much visual connection between the streets and the building (like how the floor tiling in these buildings contrasts the concrete streets, making pedestrians question whether they are in a financial class to enter one of the mixed use programs). This a rlly big problem with north american cities in general and though these developments look enticing via renders, they still aren't addressing current social issues. One aspect that comes to mind is how these projects developed parking lots but no protected bike lockers. It's great that theres transit, car, and path access but it sucks that cyclists cannot access that type of amenity
I know you just state the facts. But I am not impressed anymore with the construction projects in Toronto. They just keep adding new glass and concrete boxes to the skyline. What should impress in that? How much better becomes a view from a window in the new high-rise? We need an architectural marvel in the city, same as CN Tower once used to be. Something to impress the world and ourselves and the generations to come. Are we capable of that? Or we have to resolve the housing crisis first?
I hate the Bjark Engels proposal... at least in this location. it's clunky and blocks out the more attractive buildings of the financial core. stick it on Richmond St so it's behind the classic TO skyline. Concord Sky looks great and I hope it will be built as desgned. reminds me of the RIU Hotel building here in Guadalajara. Sugar Wharf... pure trash and greed there. its sad a lot of the stuff being built on the waterfront. all thi sdoes is maximize floors and units on that piece of land. does nothing for the aesthetic of the waterfront. love the buildings of Union Square and as nice as the park looks it seems like a gimmick idea covering the railways tracks. I could live without that element. hate the Frank Gehry design and I think it is a crime to tear down the historic buildings in that location to build these things that just look out of place there. 212 King has good potential if it is well executed. I like the slim profile as viewed from the east/west. Sky Tower is pretty sleek, but I think it got a bit less so from the original design. the execution on the first tower that is currently nearing completion looks good so hopefully that will carry over to the tallest of this group. I have serious doubts that 1200 Bay will be built as shown... I wouldnt want to be at the top of that thing on a windy winter day! I'm mixed about The ONE... yes, its unique for Canada and this city but still overall fits into the glass box category for me. I'm much more interested in seeing sleek sculptural designs OR even post modern (stone clad) which this city seems to have given up on building.
Toronto needs to move away from glass. It's way too much, makes everything look sterile and cold. To add to that, there's almost always a large amount of dead space around these projects. Street level aesthetics should matter to everyone because holy, Toronto is depressing as F with the cold and corporate streets we have in our downtown.
Many people like myself certainly agree with you. All the glass and steel makes everything confusing and at street level, things are way out of scale. However, the city does it anyways, because city officials need more revenue to pay for all the financially unproductive developments in the city (i.e.: street-road hybrids, cul de sacs, oversized parking lots, highways, etc.)
@@mikeheaton8424 I totally (but respectfully!) disagree In the 70's, the strip was tremendously seedy Economically, it was a desert (pinball joints, strip clubs, and Mr. Sub are not the basis for a prosperous centre) As a kid, I was there all the time And even at that age, I knew it was decrepit But don't worry, contemporary Yonge is anything but "sterile" E.G. Yonge-Dundas is a tremendous magnet for people, events, unauthorized buskers, etc. And the same is true all along Yonge Street This trip down memory lane has put me in the mood to find that old Malibu Classic and drive up and down the strip right now, with my stereo blasting some Neil Young! Meet you at The Colonial Tavern...?? LOL
Would love to see something similar but just for the Y&E neighborhood. To go from the 150m Minto a decade ago to the various proposals around 200m in an area that is primarily residential has been fascinating to watch.
Why do we need such skyscrapers? Especially at Y&E? Plus who can aford these shoe boxes? Instead we need normal 5-20 stories buildings with decent size of appartments, with some nice area around the buildings... Toronto has so much potential around the lake and some very old agly buildings all across the city and neighbourhouds which needs to be destroyed and replaced with nice livable and humanely buildings!!!
The One is not as great looking as you say. It's neighbour across the street has a much more attractive facade and the brown colour scheme of the interiors makes it look like it was designed in the 1970s, not the coolest period for architecture and design.
@@thunderbird4709 Fair Enough, Sugar Wharf looks pretty shat as well. They always look better in the render and then after built the city looks like a toddler designed it with Legos.
So, you don't work for developers, eh? Ok then, why hiding all the way the most important piece of info - PRICE PER SQ FT ?? Without it, this is kinda semi-useless blabber about this and that super tall bla bla..
What's your fav building proposal? Least favourite?
Definitely the One. The foundation is super unique. It's super cool how you can just walk under a building that tall.
I want to see Toronto take more risks - taller and less straight. Most buildings are still straight glass condo. I sed New York and Chicago building less but qualities are better.
Either the one or sky tower.
@@incredibility4224 big fan of both personally
@@Precondo yeah love them both! they will really add to the skyline positively and are both currently under construction. Really hoping the one gets the extra floors it would make it even more breathtaking upon completion.
I’m digging concord sky right now
Absolutely love Toronto. We’ll be there in 2 weeks. Can’t wait. If it wasn’t for the nasty winters, I’d live there in a heartbeat.
Prepare yourself to be disappointed. Though one thing is travelel, the other is live.
Sky Tower now approved at 344.9m
Spotted the CN Tower once from a spot closer to Pennsylvania than the tower, 74 miles. Keep broadening the horizons!
Where was it?
Canada needs a world class city on par with London, Paris or Shanghai
The irony of posting about super tall towers on the day that crane operators all go on strike. 😊
In my opinion Toronto should protect the view of the CN Tower in some places !
Great video, thanks for posting.
I want to see a 400+ meter office in Toronto
same here
One day🤞🏻
YES!
Same here
Damn. Vancouver needs to step its game up
Awesome. This is all great for the city, jobs, construction etc.
Should do a video of office towers/structural steel buildings
the anti condo/ high rise people are annoying af!.... its a CITY, what do you expect!! them to waste land space and build a park or a town house ?? you've got to utilize the space completely!!! so i say bring on the high rises!! make them taller so toronto can have more tourist attractions they make the city / skyline look beautiful
If one thing holds Toronto back from moving up to an Alpha city, it is the Torontonians that fight everything and complain about everything. There seems to be a strong streak of insecurity and fear of greatness.
They should just make the 298m and 299m ones a few meters taller just for the super tall status
5:00: What does "just over 87 stories" mean? 88 stories? Not to nitpick, but the phrase stuck in my ear.
just gibberish from speaking into a camera for so long, its 87 storeys
Great episode! 👍
Great content, appreciate the hard work! I would love to see some analysis of previous major projects in the city for lessons that can be learned going forward.
Man has been intrigued by tall structures for millennia. Think "The Hanging Gardens of Babylon" at 80 feet built circa 605 BC, and "The Lighthouse of Alexandria" 246 BC and almost 400 feet tall. Jordon would have been a curious little Babylonian if he had lived back then, as would I. Love your website Jordan. I look forward to an update.
What is the source of the model?
How do you get the 3d sketchup model of the downtown?
Search for Stephen Velasco future model toronto
Sorry I don't have the actual link, but it's available on the City of Toronto website.
I'm in Atlanta but I spent a lot of summers in Toronto (North York) in the 80's and 90's because I have a lot of relatives there. One thing I've seen in Toronto is the massive number of residential projects all around the metro area. This is also happening in Atlanta. But is there enough office space in downtown Toronto for the massive growth of the metro area? I do realize that Covid sent a lot of workers home where many now want to continue to work from.
Toronto downtown already boasts 3rd largest office area by square footage after Manhattan and Chicago.
many of those lazy POS's want to continue working from home. I find it remarkable that any office projects are continuing to go ahead. last I checked there was about 8% vacancy rate downtown and 12-20% vacancy in the suburbs.
Those super tall buildings I wouldn’t buy on any higher than the 10th because waiting for the elevators then getting on with tons of people is a pain.
Great video and channel -- liked and subscribed!
great video...well done
Cool comparison. Do you know why the city and developers are never fully aligned with approvals? How is it that a developer can get approval for a certain height then seek for higher at a later time? Why didn't they just approve them for what they want in the first place?
that's a good question, but a little above my pay grade
if you look through development proposals you'll often notice density gets chiselled down by the city before final site plan approval - so it's my view from speaking to some developers about this, they'll often ask for more density then they know they're going to get
as a general rule of thumb, the lower the density, the harder it is to achieve target profit margins on a site, so they always aim high, even if above the density precedent in the neighbourhood plan in many instances
@@PrecondoThanks. I see that all the time. Developers always shoot for the stars when it comes to overall height and number of storeys. But often times, when they are realistic with their height, the city usually almost approves it only with minor cosmetic changes. I think at the end of the day, it comes down to how much taxes and revenue it can generate for them. 🤦♂️
all about payoffs!
Are all these projects actually approved/confirmed to be constructed? I thought some of them were still awaiting approval. Or maybe you are guessing that they will be approved?
Some approved some awaiting approvals
This is very personal but every one of these buildings better have overhangs on ground level. It's so annoying that architecture in ontario ignores ppl walking and looking up from the streets
fair but some of the projects here actually have really good street level design - and if you look into the architectural plans you'll see some put lots of thought into the pedestrian + retail experience
@@Precondo I see what you mean, but none of them have overhangs. If you look into the architectural elevations you won't see overhangs or much visual connection between the streets and the building (like how the floor tiling in these buildings contrasts the concrete streets, making pedestrians question whether they are in a financial class to enter one of the mixed use programs). This a rlly big problem with north american cities in general and though these developments look enticing via renders, they still aren't addressing current social issues. One aspect that comes to mind is how these projects developed parking lots but no protected bike lockers. It's great that theres transit, car, and path access but it sucks that cyclists cannot access that type of amenity
@@mymocs61 you have bike lockers at both Forma and Sky Tower for reference
@@Precondo 2/5 towers? And still no overhangs :/
@@Precondo 2/9*
I know you just state the facts. But I am not impressed anymore with the construction projects in Toronto. They just keep adding new glass and concrete boxes to the skyline. What should impress in that? How much better becomes a view from a window in the new high-rise? We need an architectural marvel in the city, same as CN Tower once used to be. Something to impress the world and ourselves and the generations to come. Are we capable of that? Or we have to resolve the housing crisis first?
love red path there the smells of sweet sugar brown its like a historic site gotta love it
I am interested in getting a unit in a few of these. Can you help out?
yes, jordon@precondo.ca
Why could Toronto use some more super talls? The infrastructure of the city (i.e. subway) is already overwhelmed.
I hate the Bjark Engels proposal... at least in this location. it's clunky and blocks out the more attractive buildings of the financial core. stick it on Richmond St so it's behind the classic TO skyline. Concord Sky looks great and I hope it will be built as desgned. reminds me of the RIU Hotel building here in Guadalajara. Sugar Wharf... pure trash and greed there. its sad a lot of the stuff being built on the waterfront. all thi sdoes is maximize floors and units on that piece of land. does nothing for the aesthetic of the waterfront. love the buildings of Union Square and as nice as the park looks it seems like a gimmick idea covering the railways tracks. I could live without that element. hate the Frank Gehry design and I think it is a crime to tear down the historic buildings in that location to build these things that just look out of place there. 212 King has good potential if it is well executed. I like the slim profile as viewed from the east/west. Sky Tower is pretty sleek, but I think it got a bit less so from the original design. the execution on the first tower that is currently nearing completion looks good so hopefully that will carry over to the tallest of this group. I have serious doubts that 1200 Bay will be built as shown... I wouldnt want to be at the top of that thing on a windy winter day! I'm mixed about The ONE... yes, its unique for Canada and this city but still overall fits into the glass box category for me. I'm much more interested in seeing sleek sculptural designs OR even post modern (stone clad) which this city seems to have given up on building.
Toronto needs to move away from glass. It's way too much, makes everything look sterile and cold. To add to that, there's almost always a large amount of dead space around these projects. Street level aesthetics should matter to everyone because holy, Toronto is depressing as F with the cold and corporate streets we have in our downtown.
I agree, I feel like the suburbs have less glass condominiums compared to Downtown and they look a lot nicer
Yonge street used to have character , I used to love going down to the strip in the 70 s . Now it’s sterile .
Many people like myself certainly agree with you. All the glass and steel makes everything confusing and at street level, things are way out of scale.
However, the city does it anyways, because city officials need more revenue to pay for all the financially unproductive developments in the city (i.e.: street-road hybrids, cul de sacs, oversized parking lots, highways, etc.)
I really like the glass as long as they are interesting architecturally.
@@mikeheaton8424 I totally (but respectfully!) disagree
In the 70's, the strip was tremendously seedy
Economically, it was a desert (pinball joints, strip clubs, and Mr. Sub are not the basis for a prosperous centre)
As a kid, I was there all the time
And even at that age, I knew it was decrepit
But don't worry, contemporary Yonge is anything but "sterile"
E.G. Yonge-Dundas is a tremendous magnet for people, events, unauthorized buskers, etc.
And the same is true all along Yonge Street
This trip down memory lane has put me in the mood to find that old Malibu Classic and drive up and down the strip right now, with my stereo blasting some Neil Young!
Meet you at The Colonial Tavern...?? LOL
Would love to see something similar but just for the Y&E neighborhood. To go from the 150m Minto a decade ago to the various proposals around 200m in an area that is primarily residential has been fascinating to watch.
agreed
Why do we need such skyscrapers? Especially at Y&E? Plus who can aford these shoe boxes? Instead we need normal 5-20 stories buildings with decent size of appartments, with some nice area around the buildings... Toronto has so much potential around the lake and some very old agly buildings all across the city and neighbourhouds which needs to be destroyed and replaced with nice livable and humanely buildings!!!
@@goricacvetkovic4534if that happens the affordability would even be unbelievable.
The One is not as great looking as you say. It's neighbour across the street has a much more attractive facade and the brown colour scheme of the interiors makes it look like it was designed in the 1970s, not the coolest period for architecture and design.
The One, Youge and Bloor is super ugly, The rest look pretty nice though.
In what world is Sugar Wharf better looking than the One ?
@@thunderbird4709 Fair Enough, Sugar Wharf looks pretty shat as well. They always look better in the render and then after built the city looks like a toddler designed it with Legos.
So, you don't work for developers, eh? Ok then, why hiding all the way the most important piece of info - PRICE PER SQ FT ?? Without it, this is kinda semi-useless blabber about this and that super tall bla bla..
It’s not semi useless blabber, for construction and skyscraper enthusiasts like me this is very interesting, even if all you hear is bla bla bla.
@@MarcelPatilaya he has some good info, but fails to inform on some crucial points.
Not the point of the video, bruh!
@@y.g.1313 and that makes the video useless blabber bla bla, ok sure.
2:18 He is disappointed their won't be a casino WTF? 4 former mayors came out of retirement just to say that a casino is a bad idea.
Fake fake TH-cam information dude?