HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #341  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 11:31 AM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,097
Quote:
Originally Posted by Crawford View Post
One thing that's odd about the GTA is that the fancy areas often have the least construction, and the less desirable areas often have the most "luxury condos". Probably trans-national differences in zoning and regulatory framework.

For example, Yonge north of the 401 is kinda dumpy. But there's an orgy of gigantic towers everywhere, topped only by downtown Toronto. And most look pretty expensive and upscale. Yonge south of the 401 is very affluent, but looks basically the same as 25 years ago, when I was visiting nearby relatives as a kid. There are numerous SFH teardowns, but the essential character is the same. North York looks like some alien spacecraft touched down.
****

Others have noted the zoning permissions, which I will come back to........but the first thing is to correct the overly-broad statements about dumpiness.

Yonge St. north of the 401 was them main drag of the former municipality of North York; and before that, the village of Lansing.
The bulk of it went up post WWII; 3-5 decades after most of Lawrence Park, the residential area you noted south of 401.

There were some older heritage homes which looked quite nice, but many were demo'ed to make way for the towers you see today....

This is an example of a remnant older home from downtown North York.



Not so dumpy, LOL.

Quote:
If Toronto were in the U.S., Yonge north of the 401 would still be dumpy strip malls and worn bungalows, and any construction would be concentrated to the south. Toronto's growth is much more efficient, but it's hard to understand.
When it comes to zoning, here's what you need to know, before amalgamation, North York York was led by a rather boisterous former furniture salesman as Mayor named Mel Lastman. He had dreams of North York having a downtown and skyline all its own.

The Yonge subway had extended up to this area of Yonge in the 1970s, when it was still mostly low density, mainly to provide vast parking lots at its northern terminus (Finch) which could serve the then outer burbs and ex-urbs.

Mayor Mel, however, had more grandiose thoughts, and lobbied aggressively for an an east-west subway to serve his would-be downtown.

(Line 4 / Sheppard); a truncated version of which was built.

At the time, Downtown Toronto, while healthy was actually losing some office development to the suburbs, something supported by the then Metro government and even the 'old' City of Toronto which didn't need the extra assessment dollars and didn't particularly desire to be crowded (Toronto briefly imposed an 8-storey height limit on much of the core in the 70s)

Its in that context the towers began to rise in North York, first as offices and a hotel and later a smattering of the first wave of condos.

But the density permissions that had been put in place would come in handy when the amalgamated City began its super-boom some years later.

***

By contrast, there was never any desire to see skyscrapers in Lawrence Park.
__________________
An environmentally conscientious, libertarian inclined, fiscally conservative, socialist.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #342  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 11:37 AM
Northern Light Northern Light is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2009
Location: Toronto
Posts: 1,097
When one speaks of suburban density in Toronto, I can't help but think of any area whose skyline I photographed just last weekend.

I was out walking in west end and a great view corridor along Riverside Drive affords some great shots of the Humber Bay Shores area.



This area was a strip of seedy motels right into the mid 1990s.

They dated from the era when that was the outskirts of the City of Toronto (Etobicoke/Mimico really)

In the 90s, the province bought out most of the motels ostensibly for waterfront parkland (Which was put in); but decided to offset the cost by permitting development to overlook said new parks.

When the idea was first mooted, I don't think any one conceived of the height/density that would subsequently arrive.
__________________
An environmentally conscientious, libertarian inclined, fiscally conservative, socialist.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #343  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 9:00 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 9,258
a good comparison for Humber Bay:

2009:



2021:

[IMG][/IMG]

2031? (This development has been approved and is now moving forward with it's first phase)

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #344  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 9:05 PM
Innsertnamehere's Avatar
Innsertnamehere Innsertnamehere is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2010
Location: Hamilton
Posts: 9,258
of course NYC has some similar parallels - LIC comes to mind.

2009:



2021:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #345  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 9:34 PM
iheartthed iheartthed is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: New York
Posts: 7,043
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #346  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 9:58 PM
homebucket homebucket is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Location: The Bay
Posts: 5,485
I think the main takeaway here is also how much higher quality the Google Street View images are now.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #347  
Old Posted Apr 13, 2022, 10:05 PM
suburbanite's Avatar
suburbanite suburbanite is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Apr 2011
Location: Toronto & NYC
Posts: 4,702
Quote:
Originally Posted by homebucket View Post
I think the main takeaway here is also how much higher quality the Google Street View images are now.
What's crazy is the increase in quality between the first iteration of Streetview around 2007, and the next round in 2009. I don't know what changed in those first two years, but it's been mostly diminishing returns since.

2007:



2009:

__________________
Discontented suburbanite since 1994
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #348  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 7:57 PM
WhipperSnapper's Avatar
WhipperSnapper WhipperSnapper is offline
I am the law!
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Toronto+
Posts: 19,939
Grand and Toy
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #349  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:02 PM
SAN Man SAN Man is offline
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2021
Location: San Diego, California
Posts: 725
These before and afters kind of freak me out a little bit. It makes you think that an unbalanced amount of newly created capital all went into real estate speculation. Did all of these cities really add that many newly created wealthy individuals that are able to afford a residence in luxury high rise? Or has an illusion been created that will be realized one day?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #350  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:18 PM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,802
Quote:
Originally Posted by SAN Man View Post
These before and afters kind of freak me out a little bit. It makes you think that an unbalanced amount of newly created capital all went into real estate speculation. Did all of these cities really add that many newly created wealthy individuals that are able to afford a residence in luxury high rise? Or has an illusion been created that will be realized one day?
What?

In 2009, there was 340 million people in the United States and Canada. In 2021, there is now 369 million between the two countries. Additionally, both have seen a resurgence of their cities as Millennials shun the boring suburbs of their parents and start their careers in big and exciting cities. I'm shocked that cities haven't grown more, but I guess NIMBYism and exclusionary zoning policies have put a cap on things.

Even though Toronto is growing like crazy now is only just a fraction of the growth of pre-war NYC. Much more room to grow.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #351  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:19 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 41,274
@ SAN Man

Could also be sharing of units as well. Like when you have units going for 4k a month or more, sometimes folks share units. There's a lot of unit sharing going on in your expensive cities.

Kind of like what they do in Central NJ with the mansions that they build in the mountains. You'll have like a 5 million dollar mansion being built, but its shared with like 20 people. I've noticed this tends to be a thing with your Indian Americans, but its smart man. If you get folks you trust, even uber-luxury units are a reality.

A life of luxury can be had for ease if your in the position of having a very strong nuclear family that shares all their income towards the mansion or lifestyle. That's why I need SSP folks to give me a ton of cash for my new Ferrari.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #352  
Old Posted Apr 14, 2022, 9:31 PM
chris08876's Avatar
chris08876 chris08876 is offline
NYC/NJ/Miami-Dade
 
Join Date: Jul 2013
Location: Riverview Estates Fairway (PA)
Posts: 41,274
Jersey City (NJ) is a beast in itself for its size. A ton going on.

As of 03-07-2022.









Reply With Quote
     
     
  #353  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 12:31 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,802
Indeed Chris

Completed / Topped Out
99 Hudson Street | residential | 76 floors | completed
Journal Squared Tower II | residential | 72 floors | completed
Urban Ready Living I | residential | 69 floors | completed
25 Columbus (The Charlotte) | residential/school | 57 floors | topped out
Journal Squared Tower I | residential | 54 floors | completed
65 Bay Street | residential | 50 floors | completed
70 Columbus Plaza | residential | 50 floors | completed
90 Columbus Plaza | residential | 50 floors | completed
33 Park II | residential | 44 floors | completed
331 Marin Boulevard I | residential | 41 floors | topped out
351 Marin Boulevard II | residential | 38 floors | completed
VYV II | residential | 35 floors | completed
The Ellipse | residential | 33 floors | completed
88 Regent St | residential | 32 floors | completed
Emerson Lofts I | residential | 26 floors | topped out
700 Washington Boulevard I | residential | 24 floors | completed
28 Cottage | residential | 20 floors | completed
289 Jordan Ave | residential | 16 floors | completed
87 Newkirk St | residential | 14 Floors | completed
3 Journal Square Plaza | residential | 13 floors | completed
175 Second Street | residential | 13 floors |completed
700 Washington Boulevard II | residential | 12 floors | completed


Under Construction
Journal Squared Tower III | residential | 61 floors | under construction
30 Park Lane North | residential | 33 floors | under construction
Provost Square III | mixed-use | 33 floors | under construction
26-28 Van Reipen Avenue | residential | 27 floors | under construction
33-35 Van Reipen Avenue | residential | 27 floors | under construction
415-435 Summit Avenue | mixed-use | 27 floors | under construction
571-577 Pavonia Ave (Journal Square Urby) | residential | 25 floors | excavation
262 Johnson Avenue | mixed-use | 25 floors | under construction
407-413 Summit Ave | residential | 19 floors | under construction
711 Montgomery St | residential | 16 floors | excavation
32 Oakland | residential | 14 floors | under construction
161 Van Wagenen Ave | residential | 13 floors | under construction
345 Baldwin | residential | 13 floors | under construction
358 Martin Luther King Drive (Jersey City Public Safety Building) | government | 12 floors | under construction
144 First St | residential | 12 floors | under construction
One Grove | residential | 12 floors | under construction


Approved
444 Washington Boulevard | residential | 70 floors | approved
560 Marin Blvd | residential | 59 floors | approved
580 Marin Blvd | residential | 57 floors | approved
808 Pavonia I | residential | 57 floors | approved
499-501 Summit Avenue | residential | 53 floors | approved
808 Pavonia II | residential | 51 floors | approved
150 River Drive Tower A | residential | 48 floors | approved
500 Summit Ave | mixed use | 42 floors | approved
Pier Six IV | residential | 39 floors | approved
150 River Drive Tower B | residential | 38 floors | approved
Pier Six I | residential | 33 floors | approved
Pier Six II | residential | 33 floors | approved
Pier Six III | residential | 33 floors | approved
32-38 Cottage St. | residential | 32 floors | approved
2958 Kennedy Blvd | residential | 31 floors | aproved
414 Hoboken Avenue (Bergen Arch Plaza I) | residential | 28 floors | approved
414 Hoboken Avenue (Bergen Arch Plaza II) | residential | 28 floors | approved
11-29 Cottage Street | residential | 28 floors | approved
21-29 Van Reipen Avenue | residential | 27 floors | approved
622 Summit | residential | 27 floors | approved
630-632 Newark Ave | mixed use | 27 floors | approved
262 Johnson | residential | 24 floors | approved
619 Marin Blvd | residential | 24 floors | approved
St Lucy's Redevelopment | residential | 23 floors | approved
286 Coles St | residential | 21 floors | approved
2973 JFK Blvd | residential | 20 floors | approved | article
417 Communipaw Avenue | residential | 20 floors | approved
165-173 Academy St | mixed | 19 floors | approved
198 Academy | residential | 18 floors | approved
682 Route 440 aka 11 Bennett St | residential | 15 floors | approved | article
150 River Drive Tower C | residential | 14 floors | approved
232-238 Sip Ave | mixed | 14 floors | approved
1075 West Side Ave I | residential | 13 floors | approved
1075 West Side Ave II | residential | 13 floors | approved
44-48 Newkirk Ave | residential | 12 floors | approved
96-110 Tonnele Ave | residential |12 floors | approved
2 Hoboken Ave | residential | 13 floors | approved
305 Coles St I | residential | 12 floors | approved
305 Coles St II | residential | 12 floors | approved
100 Colden Street | residential | 12 floors | approved
20 Carbon Place I | residential | 12 floors | approved
20 Carbon Place II | residential | 12 floors | approved
3085 JFK Blvd I | residential | 12 floors | approved
3085 JFK Blvd II | residential | 12 floors | approved
Bayfront Development | mixed-use | multiple | approved


Proposed
242 Hudson Street (Harbourside XIII) | residential | 68 floors | proposed
107 Morgan | residential | 60+ floors | proposed
Water/Culver Parcel I | residential | 55 floors | proposed
Water/Culver Parcel II | mixed-use | 55 floors | proposed
Water/Culver Parcel III | mixed-use | 38 floors | proposed
Harborside Plaza IV | office | 38 floors | proposed
Water/Culver Parcel IV | mixed-use | 30 floors | proposed
Holland Park I | residential | 18 floors | proposed
Holland Park II | residential | 18 floors | proposed
597 Marin Boulevard aka 166 14th Street | residential | 14 floors | proposed
44-48 Newkirk St | residential | 13 floors | proposed


Stalled/Stale
30 Journal Square Plaza | residential | 72 floors | stalled
Urban Ready Living II | residential | 69 floors | stalled
Urban Ready Living III | residential | 65 floors | stalled
One Journal Square I | residential | 56 floors | stalled
One Journal Square II | residential | 56 floors | stalled
101 Newkirk St. | residential | 50 floors | stalled
180 Baldwin Ave | mixed-use | 25 floors | stalled
177 Grand Street I | residential | 22 floors | stalled
177 Grand Street II | residential | 16 floors | stalled
448-466 Grand St | residential | 13 floors | stalled
15 Nardone Place I | residential | 13 floors | stalled
15 Nardone Place II | residential | 11 floors | stalled
Crescent Park | mixed-use | ?? floors | stalled
Journal Square PATH Station Redevelopment | mixed-use | ?? floors | stalled
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #354  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 12:33 AM
MAC123 MAC123 is online now
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2021
Location: Deadend town, Flyover State.
Posts: 742
Isn't Jersey City or Newark or something like that building the most units anywhere in the US?
__________________
NYC - 20 Supertalls (including UC)
NYC - Future 2035 supertalls - 45 + not including anything that gets newly proposed between now and then (which will likely put it over 50)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #355  
Old Posted Apr 16, 2022, 12:36 AM
C. C. is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2014
Posts: 2,802
Talking

Quote:
Originally Posted by MAC123 View Post
Isn't Jersey City or Newark or something like that building the most units anywhere in the US?
On a per capita basis, Jersey City takes the cake.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #356  
Old Posted Apr 19, 2022, 6:08 PM
tdawg's Avatar
tdawg tdawg is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Astoria, NY
Posts: 2,858
That JC list is nuts. Can't wait to see what the skyline looks like just after all the approved are built let alone the proposed.
__________________
From my head via my fingers.
Reply With Quote
     
     
End
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Discussion Forums > City Discussions
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 1:44 AM.

     

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2022, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.