Automation Gallery said:
Wow....Toronto is on fire:cool:

23 SPADINA AVE
Ward 20 - Tor & E.York District

Application for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval to permit redevelopment of the block with two residential condominium towers of 79 and 68 storeys, inclusive of a 10 storey mixed use podium comprised of retail, office, residential dwelling units and accessory uses.
Proposed Use --- # of Storeys --- # of Units ---
Applications:
Type Number Date Submitted Status
Site Plan Approval 14 204227 STE 20 SA Aug 11, 2014 Under Review
Rezoning 14 204219 STE 20 OZ Aug 11, 2014 Under Review
Click to expand...

The taller tower should say 75 storeys instead of 79s

23 SPADINA AVE
Ward 20 - Tor & E.York District

Application for a Zoning By-law Amendment and Site Plan Approval to permit redevelopment of the block with two residential condominium towers of 75 and 68 storeys, inclusive of a 10 storey mixed use podium comprised of retail, office, residential dwelling units and accessory uses.
Proposed Use --- # of Storeys --- # of Units ---
Applications:
Type Number Date Submitted Status
Site Plan Approval 14 204227 STE 20 SA Aug 11, 2014 Under Review
Rezoning 14 204219 STE 20 OZ Aug 11, 2014 Under Review
 
It could but I doubt the make up is any different from other mixed use podiums in Cityplace. Some retail, some office and, mostly residential.
 
maestro said:
It could but I doubt the make up is any different from other mixed use podiums in Cityplace. Some retail, some office and, mostly residential.
Click to expand...

That is correct, though the entire block will have retail uses, as opposed to only a single face like most buildings in CityPlace. The second floor will be the office space, and then mostly residential like you mentioned. There will be a pretty cool glass atrium that runs through the block also, allowing you to see from one end to the other.
 
They need to be at least 65+ stories to really stand out in city place
 
10310654_10154638310145133_7500825479752624747_n.jpg
 

Attachments

  • 10310654_10154638310145133_7500825479752624747_n.jpg
    10310654_10154638310145133_7500825479752624747_n.jpg
    104.4 KB · Views: 2,294
WiddleBittyKitty said:
One figures they would have paid more attention to the details at such a prominent project for them, but everything at Parade other than the bridge itself is so ordinary.
Click to expand...

Would it be the developer or the architect that should pay more attention to the details? KPF was the architect on the Parade project and I'm sure they paid quite a bit for this well-know firm to do the design of the building.. likely, they will use p+s to design this building keep costs down.
 
Last edited:
Is that the design on the Development Application notice? I had been expecting a cruciform design for the towers based on earlier posts on this thread, but based on this image, they look like two rectangular towers at right angles to each other. There's too little resolution to make out much in the way of details, maybe somebody could get a close-up of the drawing on the notice?
 
Mongo said:
That's what I thought, but the image on the Development Application notice appears to show two rectangular towers.
Click to expand...

Would not cruciform towers appear rectangular from the side? That's not exactly a high-res drawing.
 
Ramako said:
Would not cruciform towers appear rectangular from the side? That's not exactly a high-res drawing.
Click to expand...

Which was why I was asking for a higher-resolution image. If it IS cruciform in design, it must be extremely subtle, with the projecting parts barely extending out beyond the main body. In this case, I would not call it cruciform, but rectangular with corner notches.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top