Griffix - 20 étages (2013)

[Falcon-Z]

En fin de semaine j'ai observé l'application du ciment sur la façade qui donne sur Peel et c'est vraiment botché!! On y voit clairement differents tons de couleur de beton.

 

J'espere l'esthetique n'est pas finale...

 

Sent from my SGH-I337M using Tapatalk

[ScarletCoral]

En fin de semaine j'ai observé l'application du ciment sur la façade qui donne sur Peel et c'est vraiment botché!! On y voit clairement differents tons de couleur de beton.

 

J'espere l'esthetique n'est pas finale...

 

Sur les photos déjà postées, on voyait déjà les différents tons de gris sur les façades... c'est p-ê voulu?

[DJD]

It's also a cost question. Making unique and bold architecture has a cost! A big one.

 

Most projects are forced to include some sort of social housing either directly in the project, or pay to have it elsewhere. They are often also forced to pay to make a portion of the land into a public alleyway or public ''street park''. This is done at a loss.

 

Now, with a height constraint and a cost of land very high, it is difficult for the projects to sell at prices lower than 350$ a square foot. Just the construction cost (no land, no permits, no design and no sales offices or advertisement) is most likely in the 150$ to 200$ a square foot range depending of the quality. Now add the cost of land, permits, taxes, interests, advertisement and all... you are already talking 250-300$ a foot.

 

So, you want a nice design and amazing materials, get ready to pay 400-450$ a foot minimum because you can't maximize land cost vertically. Buildings downtown don't have this problem: they can build on 50 floors instead of 8, maximizing the cost of land and permit and amenities. They get a nicer design and people are ready to pay 500-550$ a sqft.

 

I think there's a direct correlation between project quality and cost. If you look from Griffix > Murray > Lowney > Le Canal > Myst, you are also looking at price increases for design quality. Not a lot of people are ready to pay 600 000$ for a sub 1000sqft condo!

 

You are 100% right.

 

And yes its a shame that most people are willing to accept mediocrity if they can pay less but keep in mind that most of these people could not afford to pay more, sadly this is Quebec reality.

[vivreenrégion]

adly this is Quebec reality

it's the same everywhere in Canada. Condos look mostly like shit. C'est encore pire ailleurs qu'à Montréal, ça coûte plus cher.

http://i1261.photobucket.com/albums/ii586/e17224/Aura/IMG_2497_zps90d917ea.jpg

http://thetorontoblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Aura-condos-December-6-2012-IMG_0235.jpg

I mean... come on.

Modifié 18 décembre 2013 par vivreenrégion

[SynosiK]

it's the same everywhere in Canada. Condos look mostly like shit. C'est encore pire ailleurs qu'à Montréal, ça coûte plus cher.

http://i1261.photobucket.com/albums/ii586/e17224/Aura/IMG_2497_zps90d917ea.jpg

http://thetorontoblog.com/wp-content/uploads/2012/12/Aura-condos-December-6-2012-IMG_0235.jpg

I mean... come on.

 

C'est quoi le probleme avec la tour Aura? Je la trouve tres bien moi!

[ScarletCoral]

J'étais en réunion ce matin au 111 Duke, j'en ai profité pour prendre une petite photo sous la neige

 

 

Modifié 20 décembre 2013 par ScarletCoral

[joss]

Montréal est quand mieux que Détroit pour ceux qui chiale que l architecture des nouveaux gratte-ciel fait dure .Aux moins ont construit.

[qwerty]

La portion laide de ce building sera caché dans le futur. Est ce que je me trompe?

[Habsfan]

It's also a cost question. Making unique and bold architecture has a cost! A big one.

 

Most projects are forced to include some sort of social housing either directly in the project, or pay to have it elsewhere. They are often also forced to pay to make a portion of the land into a public alleyway or public ''street park''. This is done at a loss.

 

Now, with a height constraint and a cost of land very high, it is difficult for the projects to sell at prices lower than 350$ a square foot. Just the construction cost (no land, no permits, no design and no sales offices or advertisement) is most likely in the 150$ to 200$ a square foot range depending of the quality. Now add the cost of land, permits, taxes, interests, advertisement and all... you are already talking 250-300$ a foot.

 

So, you want a nice design and amazing materials, get ready to pay 400-450$ a foot minimum because you can't maximize land cost vertically. Buildings downtown don't have this problem: they can build on 50 floors instead of 8, maximizing the cost of land and permit and amenities. They get a nicer design and people are ready to pay 500-550$ a sqft.

 

I think there's a direct correlation between project quality and cost. If you look from Griffix > Murray > Lowney > Le Canal > Myst, you are also looking at price increases for design quality. Not a lot of people are ready to pay 600 000$ for a sub 1000sqft condo!

 

So if I understand correctly, this would be an excellent reason to get rid of the height restrictions in this city!!! With more height, the promoter can add more units and therefore reduce the cost per square foot, and in turn this allows the promoter to hire better architects and get a better design quality!

[LindbergMTL]

So if I understand correctly, this would be an excellent reason to get rid of the height restrictions in this city!!!!

 

Oui, et ce facteur va finalement triompher des restrictions en hauteur arbitraires et uniformisantes.