London Construction - Development News Thread#1

[MolsonExport]

I will miss the dept store (I browsed, but never bought anything) but this is a very positive development. Dundas st. is back. Storefront vacancies along the two-block stretch should vanish.

[ssiguy]

This is nothing but great news.

It brings more students and vitality downtown and maintains the integrity of the venerable Kingsmill's store. That is a large store and finding tenants for it would be very difficult and if it was left empty for too long it would decay and eventually have to be torn down and that would be a real loss for the city and the core.

This is the kind of development that the core desperately needs and with a good demographic. The young will want to live near school especially if it's downtown and they will also be shoppers and be eating out a lot giving a real boost to Dundas and the entire core. This would be $10 million VERY well spent. Now if only Western would do something.

[tolosulode]

Enrollment at Fanshawe is down for a third year running.

Why the excitement to house a diminishing entity?

[sparky212]

Something big starting up
http:// http://metronews.ca/news/london/1171528/london-planners-to-ask-council-to-approve-high-rise-on-health-unit-lands/

[MrSlippery519]

Certainly a great spot for a new development there, i am not sure I understand that height cap of 95m to keep it in line with the Renaissance towers though?

Hope this gets built and hope they push it past 1000, they are talking about the importance with the forks, etc so make the tower a staple to downtown.

[MolsonExport]

LFP article on the proposed 30-storey condo tower at the forks:
Forks Fight: Renaissance residents angry about proposed 30-storey downtown London highrise

[Honest Scientist]

I will be VERY disappointed if this is limited to 95m. They should be encouraging a building in the 120m - 140m (or even higher!) range, IMHO.

I agree with all the other design stipulations they are talking about for this (glass not concrete, tower up against Ridout, narrow SQUARE floorplate, get rid of the slab parking, etc.), but this is the PRIME lot for something really tall.

Imagine how the 'face' of downtown (which to me is the view from the west, with the forks of the Thames at the fore) would look with a 45+ story, well designed, single tower as the focal point. It would give us a much more identifiable skyline. Otherwise, we're going to get a 'clump' of buildings around the same size - something we have way too much of. It may as well be the third twin to the Renascence towers if they make this one the same size.

The taller this project (and any other new ones are ) the better the chances of a downtown grocery store, and an overall increase in vibrancy and 'life' in the core.

London just refuses to think big. JLC only 9,000 seats (should have been 11,000 to 12,000), a new Preforming Arts Centre that would only have 1400 seats (as opposed to say a 2000 seat Bass Hall in Fort Worth - look it up, its spectacular!), and this at only 95m. This city refuses to step up, stand out and inspire. That is a big part of why people leave and businesses overlook us when choosing locations.

And as for the owners of Renascence condos complaining about losing their views? What a spoiled lot! They expected that nothing tall would go on that site, and they think they should be 'guaranteed' a permanent view? Hypocrites didn't much care when their building blocked out the south view from the north tower!

I'm afraid this will be another 'typical London under-build' and a real missed opportunity.

HS

Originally Posted by MrSlippery519

Certainly a great spot for a new development there, i am not sure I understand that height cap of 95m to keep it in line with the Renaissance towers though?

Hope this gets built and hope they push it past 1000, they are talking about the importance with the forks, etc so make the tower a staple to downtown.

[MolsonExport]

probably end up being another stubby stucco-and-concrete banality. London looks a lot like Irkutsk or Novosibirsk.

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by Honest Scientist

I will be VERY disappointed if this is limited to 95m. They should be encouraging a building in the 120m - 140m (or even higher!) range, IMHO.

JLC only 9,000 seats (should have been 11,000 to 12,000),

Well said, I agree with most of your points as well. That said when they built the JLC @ 9000 seats it was a big risk, certainly I would have liked to see bigger and looking back now that would have been the right call but it was a big risk at the time for London.

I really hope the height of this tower changes, it is a no brainier to approve something on this land but completely agree it needs to be 100m+ and be something "big" for the city and downtown. Not just another concrete 95m tower to "match" the height of other buildings.

Screw the people complaining at the Renaissance, that is a joke, you want to complain about views go talk to some people in NYC losing their park views to massive high-rises haha.

[MolsonExport]

Think of the pain of not being able to see AMdeCicco-Worst's fountain from your window.

[haljackey]

Wasn't the Health Unit lands considered for a new city hall?

People who live in the Renaissance towers will hate this proposal though, blocking their views.

[MrSlippery519]

Originally Posted by haljackey

Wasn't the Health Unit lands considered for a new city hall?

People who live in the Renaissance towers will hate this proposal though, blocking their views.

Yes it was considered for a new city hall, seems that is dead.

To the people in the Renaissance, too bad. Nothing in life is guaranteed, its not like those people didn't know a tower could block their views at some point nor would Tricar have ever guaranteed them that.

The few comments in the LFP article are hilarious...a women on the seventh floor is upset she wont get to see the sunset anymore...seriously the seventh floor??? Give me a break, the city needs to go down and tell her to shut her mouth, was likely the same women cheering for downtown development...but better not block my magical 7th floor view. Unless you have a place directly on the water or directly on a park (again going back to NYC) how can you ever think your "view" will remain?

Sorry for the slight rant

[Symz]

It sounds like there are a lot of NIMBY's and such in London, but all is not lost, London has been building in the last decade.

I think this is kind of an interesting project and I like it's location. If that lady in the article wants an unimpeded view of the water she should move into the new tower closer to the water..

Another interesting part was this

'The city’s growth blueprint, its official plan, and council, have encouraged downtown highrise development, he said.'

I honestly wish Windsor would do the same thing, you guys might think London development is slow, but this seems to be working, whereas there's nothing going in Windsor of this sort.

Is the London media playing this up to a county vs. city thing?

Anyways, good luck with this project London!

[tyeman200]

Originally Posted by MrSlippery519

Yes it was considered for a new city hall, seems that is dead.

To the people in the Renaissance, too bad. Nothing in life is guaranteed, its not like those people didn't know a tower could block their views at some point nor would Tricar have ever guaranteed them that.

The few comments in the LFP article are hilarious...a women on the seventh floor is upset she wont get to see the sunset anymore...seriously the seventh floor??? Give me a break, the city needs to go down and tell her to shut her mouth, was likely the same women cheering for downtown development...but better not block my magical 7th floor view. Unless you have a place directly on the water or directly on a park (again going back to NYC) how can you ever think your "view" will remain?

Sorry for the slight rant

People in London always need something to complain about... I think that is partly the reason projects don't get done faster. No matter what, someone out there in London will have a reason to bitch about it

[ssiguy]

Originally Posted by MolsonExport

probably end up being another stubby stucco-and-concrete banality. London looks a lot like Irkutsk or Novosibirsk.

God knows London has plenty of those but I don't think that will be the case here. The city seems pretty determined to make sure this fits in well with the area and has real esthetic appeal.

As far as the poor Rennaisance dwellers, too bad. I don't think the city will care what they think, nor should they.

[haljackey]

More towers proposed for the core, this time a pair of 16-20 story residential developments on the site of the former London Mews.

Story: http://www.lfpress.com/2014/10/05/to...n-site-of-mews

[HillStreetBlues]

Most people here are lamenting the possible 95 meter limit. 95 meters is a very tall building. 120 meters (which would be nearly 40 stories) is extremely tall. Yes, a very tall building will definitely add to the skyline from the west. But we should be much more concerned with how development interacts with the street. I like the stipulation that it come right up to Ridout, and that it not be concrete. But, really, I think that a 30 or 40-storey building has little chance of interacting well with the streetscape (as the Renaissance towers do not in my opinion). London has sufficient land downtown to build many mid-rise (8, 10, 12 stories) buildings that will add real vitality to downtown. Allow 200 (or more) units in this one condo development, and that reduces demand for those kinds of smaller projects.

That having been said, it sounds like there will be plenty of retail space at ground level, so a very good opportunity there.

Like others, I have no sympathy at all for folks in the Renaissance towers who want others to pay (in opportunity cost) for their views to be preserved. I particularly like the quote saying that these projects would bring more people to the core, and traffic is already “dreadful.” Gack.

[MolsonExport]

And the same old bullshit about "not enough parking". Every city centre worth going to has "not enough parking". The ones with ample parking are bombed out wastelands or uni-use office parks (see Houston shot below, c. 1980s). Park and walk. Take transit/cab. Pay up and shut up. Gimme densification. A city's greatness is, to a large extent, defined by its core.



ecoplan.org

[MolsonExport]

Originally Posted by haljackey

More towers proposed for the core, this time a pair of 16-20 story residential developments on the site of the former London Mews.

Story: http://www.lfpress.com/2014/10/05/to...n-site-of-mews

The cat's meow.

[haljackey]

Caranci is taking credit for this new announcement. Probably more details to come.

http://metronews.ca/news/london/1175...roger-caranci/