I probably missed it somewhere earlier in the discussion, but what was the purpose of building such a short tower in the middle of all these much taller ones?
Selling condos ?
Let me clarify. What was the point of building it so short? If the whole area is already filled with massive towers, it seems very odd to put such a short one in the middle of all of them. Why not build a tower equally as tall?
The only way to know why would be to ask the developer really. Looking at the land, they seem to have let the dimensions of the lot dictate the design.
There are though advantages to a lower and thicker building. For example you can have more elevators, a rooftop terrace, larger common areas, it’s quicker to build vs a taller building, etc.
Est-ce possible que la densité permise sur le site soit aussi une considération? Je me souviens que le projet avait demandé une dérogation pour réduire la superficie des planchers et ajouter un étage, pour conserver la même densité au final.
De mémoire, c’était le contraire. C’est le CCU qui avait proposé de réduire l’emprise de la tour et d’ajouter 10 étages. Alternative qui n’était visiblement pas intéressante financièrement car le promoteur n’a pas modifié son concept.
Dans tous les cas, la tour est nécessairement à la limite de son COS.
The Original plan always had a shorter phase 3 and I’m pretty sure it’s mainly due to density rules. That area is already hyper dense, so having another 40 floor just smacked in there would’ve been overwhelming. It’s a nice filler and makes the area more complete, and we should be having a few more towers in the area shortly.
It’s amazing how fast Roccabella has found tenants vs their counterparts in their area. It’s by far the most successful project in the Bell Centre cluster.
There’s only so much tenants are willing to pay for prime real estate, some of the locals in the are have been empty for years. They must be at a decent price point.
I actually checked this yesterday, $75 per sq ft for Roccabella. Not sure about the others though.
