DOWNTOWN | 33-Storey Highrise / 108 M / 33 Floors (PROPOSED) - Page 4

MrSlippery519 · #61 Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 1:52 PM**

They originally said they wanted to break ground in the fall so hopefully that timeline remains the same.

ssiguy · #62 Posted **Jun 4, 2014, 7:07 PM**

I just want to make sure I have this right...............these are glass towers and not concrete bunkers that the Core is use to, right?

GreatTallNorth2 · #63 Posted **Jun 5, 2014, 3:47 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ssiguy

I just want to make sure I have this right...............these are glass towers and not concrete bunkers that the Core is use to, right?

Yes, the proposal is for a glass tower(s). Let's hope it doesn't change to stucco concrete when they break ground. London's downtown could afford to have a few more glass towers and seeing as the condo/rental market seems pretty healthy right now, I am sure we could see more of these happen.

ssiguy · #64 Posted **Sep 16, 2014, 5:19 AM**

Any updates on this proposal? Is it still a go and if so when does construction start?

GreatTallNorth2 · #65 Posted **Sep 17, 2014, 1:36 AM**

I actually called the city today and talked to someone in the planning department to ask about this proposal. He said it has been approved, but now it is up to the developer move forward.

My guess is this: the developer has stated he has intentions on building a second tower and he has purchased the heritage properties to the north of the project. I would be guessing that they might be updating the design, etc. for the project as it was originally planned for the one tower (33 stories). Let's hope we get a well designed, tall set of towers (no twins!) for this project.

ssiguy · #66 Posted **Sep 17, 2014, 4:46 AM**

^ and please god, no concrete!

Thanks for the update.

haljackey · #67 Posted **Sep 17, 2014, 1:58 PM**

It's also possible that if this turns into two towers, the height will be reduced.

MrSlippery519 · #68 Posted **Sep 17, 2014, 8:15 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by haljackey

It's also possible that if this turns into two towers, the height will be reduced.

This is certainly a possibility but I do not think will be the case, Rygar seemed to want this building to be a new staple of downtown London and height will no doubt be a main selling point.

They were hoping to break ground in the fall so lets hope this does not mean a delay on construction. Has anyone been down to the site recently to see if anything is happening? I typically park nearby for Knights games so will see in the next few weeks and will snap some pictures if anything is going on.

MolsonExport · #69 Posted **Sep 18, 2014, 12:45 PM**

please not another banal twinship tower. Signature building please. London has but one (maybe two, if you count the old post office art deco masterpiece on Richmond, along with of course, 1 London Place [really not that great either, but a veritable beauty queen when stacked against the fugly concrete/stucco boxes dominating the skyline).

GreatTallNorth2 · #70 Posted **Sep 24, 2014, 7:57 PM**

Just for fun, I drove by the area where this project is planned. I decided to call the law firm, whose building sits on the lot the tower will be built. The reception told me they are no longer at the location at Fullurton/Talbot, but have recently moved to another location - so I believe the law building is now vacant. I also notice that several of those heritage properities are vacant as well. Hopefully these signs point towards some action on the lot sometime soon.

K85 · #71 Posted **Sep 27, 2014, 3:45 PM**

Inspector Gadget eh

MrSlippery519 · #72 Posted **Oct 2, 2014, 2:45 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by GreatTallNorth2

Just for fun, I drove by the area where this project is planned. I decided to call the law firm, whose building sits on the lot the tower will be built. The reception told me they are no longer at the location at Fullurton/Talbot, but have recently moved to another location - so I believe the law building is now vacant. I also notice that several of those heritage properities are vacant as well. Hopefully these signs point towards some action on the lot sometime soon.

Well done on your part good to know.

Was there any actual construction on other parts of the property? Developers said they wanted to start in the fall but with the potential second tower....or maybe one larger one who knows now.

Pblitz · #73 Posted **Dec 30, 2014, 1:46 PM**

I wonder if this project has stalled. Drove by just before Christmas and nothing seems to be happening, the fall start date has come and gone. I hope that this is not a bad sign as it would be a great project if it actually looks like the design in the proposal.

GreatTallNorth2 · #74 Posted **Dec 31, 2014, 2:43 PM**

Well it certainly has stalled as it was suppose to be under construction in the fall. The good thing is that the developer owns more land than he originally planned on building on and therefore he wants to build a second tower. So I am assuming they are reworking the plans for the site to accomodate this. I really don't know who "Rygar" is, but he is working with Allan Patton - the lawyer that has been working with former Mews development and is opposing the 50 King/Health Unit tower.

Let's hope we see some shovels in the ground in 2015.

Dither City · #75 Posted **Jan 3, 2015, 6:05 PM**

I have been curious about the Rygar corporations identity from the beginning of this proposal. Maybe this is an answer.
http://www.drewloholdings.com/commer...100-fullarton/

Snark · #76 Posted **Jan 3, 2015, 7:44 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dither City

I have been curious about the Rygar corporations identity from the beginning of this proposal. Maybe this is an answer.
http://www.drewloholdings.com/commer...100-fullarton/

Good catch. The fact that the website continues to advertise office space leases being available at this location is not encouraging at all.

So, here are the major issues:

1) Leases are advertised as continuing to remain available in the existing building on the site

2) Rygar (whoever that is) not even owning all of the land required at the time of the rollout announcement and rezoning process

3) A suspiciously aggressive groundbreaking claim of only 10 months from first announcement

4) No publicity campaign, no pre-sales drive, no website. Nothing. Once they got what they wanted from city council, this thing seems to have vanished into thin air.

5) The public face of the whole thing is a single lawyer. Typically with something like this, the businesspeople who are the developer(s) are front and centre as the public face of the development. Consider the Tricar development or even the latest rollout for King/Clarence: the business people who are the developer were front and centre.

I'm starting to seriously wonder if this is nothing but yet another PowerPoint tower - and the true goal was simply to assemble some parcels and get the rezoning set up in order to increase the land value and then flip it. I'm surprised the local media isn't sniffing around on this.

GreatTallNorth2 · #77 Posted **Jan 4, 2015, 3:30 AM**

I don't think I would call this a Powerpoint tower as there is big differences between this and the "SOHO Health" project. Although Rygar didn't own all the land at the time of the announcement, they do now. (See below under Sold properties)

http://www.myvirtualpaper.com/doc/Bu...2014112501/#36

Also Rygar has submitted pretty detailed plans of what the project will look like, a lot different than the types of proposals we see from Farhi.

Usually companies do not market buildings until the shovel is in the ground. Something has stalled the project and hey, it could be dead in the water, but let's not say this is just like any other fairy tale project we normally see. If it was just for gatherng land, then hopefully something gets built on the property later. Like I said before, if we get even 2 of the current proposals built (50 King, Danforth, Rygar), I will be happy.

bolognium · #78 Posted **Jan 4, 2015, 4:09 AM**

So, which parcels actually belong to Rygar? The link GreatTall provided shows that they purchased the corner lot at 475 Talbot. Is there evidence showing that they actually own 100 Fullerton? Also, I seem to remember talk of them acquiring the rowhouses along Talbot as well (479-489).

My initial reaction to the Drewlo page was that they're just slow to update the site.

Dither City · #79 Posted **Jan 4, 2015, 6:51 PM**

Someone appears to be assembling properties in the same area? 505 & 507 Talbot St also 94 Dufferin St I'm wondering if there's connection. Have look at the link it's in sold properties.
http://www.myvirtualpaper.com/doc/Bu...2014100101/#40

GreatTallNorth2 · #80 Posted **Jan 4, 2015, 8:40 PM**

^Not sure about those properties. In June's Business London magazine it shows Rygar purchased 479-485 Talbot Street (see below). Their proposal to the city of London was called "100 Fullerton" so here's to hoping they actually own that piece of land as well. And once again, I have see more than one report that states Rygar wants to build a "complimentary" tower to the one they have proposed.

http://www.myvirtualpaper.com/doc/Bu.../sitepages/#32