Ryan_T said:
Why the deep paths towards each pair of doors, I wonder. Is it quieter, more private, or has some sort of airflow effect?
Click to expand...
It brings 1 hallway closer to the interior of the suite instead of requiring 1 hallway through each of those suites, allowing space for there to be a room at the back of each suite. It makes for less saleable area in the building for the developer, but they'd cover that by just making each saleable square foot more expensive.

There sure won't be much natural light at the backs of those suites; purchasers may want to be careful to buy full spectrum lighting for back there.

42
 
interchange42 said:
It brings 1 hallway closer to the interior of the suite instead of requiring 1 hallway through each of those suites, allowing space for there to be a room at the back of each suite. It makes for less saleable area in the building for the developer, but they'd cover that by just making each saleable square foot more expensive.

There sure won't be much natural light at the backs of those suites; purchasers may want to be careful to buy full spectrum lighting for back there.

42
Click to expand...
Yeah, I think those halls bringing the entrance deeper into the units is one of the only good parts about this design. My assumption is that the bathroom, a closet and laundry will be to the windowless side of the door, with the primary living space in the other direction.

Don't get me wrong, though. This sort of puzzle-piece layout is indicative of units that aren't even wide enough for a miniscule bedroom without trading space off each other. I would find it awful to live in one, but I would never be a buyer of such a unit in any event.
 
Preliminary Report on this one to the next meeting of EYCC:


Given the comparatively minor differences from the previously accepted settlement offer, I would have expected this one to generate a fairly favourable report with eye to quick movement...

But the report has all the pro-forma issues to be resolved as if it were a new application. Seems odd to me.

1649166520794.png


1649166541451.png
 
I like how they decided to tear down the ugliest building on the block. But I hope the brick facades of the other buildings on this street will be preserved when the rest of the street is eventually built up.
 
Why are they building 40 storey towers in every nook and cranny around Kipling and Islington and then we have these tiny mid rises right next to Royal York???? I thought being near transit was a priority? Why do shadows matter here but not entire neighbourhoods in total shadow with horrid wind tunnels? I'm being totally serious in asking, why aren't they even proposing 20 storeys? If the land is so expensive doesn't it make more sense to use it better with more density?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top