Toronto Theatre District Residence & Riu Plaza Hotel | 156.05m | 49s | Plaza | BDP Quadrangle

Open the parking lot for condo sales maybe? Or at least, open the lot so that contractors can get into the sales office to finish it first, and then get sales going?

42
 
upload_2017-4-18_10-51-32.png
This was approved as a settlement at the OMB, according to Novae Res Urbis: http://www.omb.gov.on.ca/e-decisions/pl151191-Apr-05-2017.pdf

Now a 48-storey tower at 156m in height.

The design has been significantly revised and is MUCH more attractive in my opinion. The picture is a clip taken from NRU, so is not the best quality.
 

Attachments

  • upload_2017-4-18_10-51-32.png
    upload_2017-4-18_10-51-32.png
    267.2 KB · Views: 733
ProjectEnd said:
The design intent is to visually separate the uses / building forms: podium, hotel, residential.
Click to expand...

But why is that necessary or even desirable to do so vertically? It's hard to see at this point how that is superior (other than to add a balcony element that is otherwise not applicable to the hotel portion).

AoD
 
I'm most interested by the 353-room hotel that will go in here: that's the most rooms of any currently approved for development downtown, isn't it? I assume this will be a mid-price, approximately 3 star property? I wonder which brand will manage it…

42
 
interchange42 said:
I'm most interested by the 353-room hotel that will go in here: that's the most rooms of any currently approved for development downtown, isn't it? I assume this will be a mid-price, approximately 3 star property? I wonder which brand will manage it…

42
Click to expand...

I don't know, but I did stay in a Holiday Inn Express last night.
 
ProjectEnd said:
The design intent is to visually separate the uses / building forms: podium, hotel, residential.
Click to expand...

Sure but why is that necessary? Carry the middle portion (which I assume is the hotel portion) all the way to the top and you have a far nicer looking building. The continuing Toronto tendency to tack on balconies is odd. Few people past the 20th floor uses a balcony as it's too windy.
 
isaidso said:
Sure but why is that necessary? Carry the middle portion (which I assume is the hotel portion) all the way to the top and you have a far nicer looking building. The continuing Toronto tendency to tack on balconies is odd. Few people past the 20th floor uses a balcony as it's too windy.
Click to expand...

You're very correct. Nevermind above the 20th floor, I find most people in Toronto rarely use their balconies, even in mid-rise buildings. I think the issue is that the balconies are so shallow or small as to be useless - they can barely fit a chair or two. I'm not sure why developers bother at all (unless they plan on installing a real terrace), but I guess the market demands balconies.
 
mcornett said:
You're very correct. Nevermind above the 20th floor, I find most people in Toronto rarely use their balconies, even in mid-rise buildings. I think the issue is that the balconies are so shallow or small as to be useless - they can barely fit a chair or two. I'm not sure why developers bother at all (unless they plan on installing a real terrace), but I guess the market demands balconies.
Click to expand...

There's a difference between usage and stated desire. Developers keep building condos with balconies because they say they're continually told be prospective buyers that they'll be less inclined to purchase units without balconies.

The real issue is some combination of an actual stated mandate for balconies from buyers and developers' perception of that demand. There's a likely unknowable middle ground between those two things, but you can bet that developers will, all things considered, continue to demand balconies out of their architects.
 
I love and use my balcony. Granted, it's not high up, but for all those balcony haters out there… I rudely yawn in your general direction.

42
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top