Toronto Toronto House | 186.53m | 58s | Westbank | Hariri Pontarini

Today

DD95F614-5F86-4E83-99E5-F001FC5D0EE9.jpeg
 
This building is proof that Toronto developers need to ditch their obsession with balconies.
60 storey diving boards aren't helpful, but what I'd like to see is an increase in actual, livable, usable, outdoor space, as is common in the Lower Mainland. In all honesty, paying more attention to what's going on out west has completely black pilled me on our garbage development culture. There are few instances where folks pay so much for so little as in Toronto.

And this is Concord...

concord-metrotown-17.jpg


121228885_379014516839768_1979099920216184488_n.jpg


558sf in Toronto would be a 1+den or a small 2br.
floorplan-3yfr.jpeg
 
I heard somewhere that the city is starting to comment on applications that they don't want balconies wider than 1.5 metres.. so good luck with that!
 
I heard somewhere that the city is starting to comment on applications that they don't want balconies wider than 1.5 metres.. so good luck with that!
my sense is that refers to simple (square or rectangular projection) balconies and how far they stick out from the edges of the building. examples like shown above where the majority of the open space is still inside the footprint of the building shouldnt be affected. it would be an exceedingly limiting factor if it were the case.
 
I heard somewhere that the city is starting to comment on applications that they don't want balconies wider than 1.5 metres.. so good luck with that!
That was me. It's 1.6m. Clownish absurdity.
my sense is that refers to simple (square or rectangular projection) balconies and how far they stick out from the edges of the building. examples like shown above where the majority of the open space is still inside the footprint of the building shouldnt be affected. it would be an exceedingly limiting factor if it were the case.
But in a world where the City restricts developers to 750sm plates, it does affect us.
 
That was me. It's 1.6m. Clownish absurdity.

But in a world where the City restricts developers to 750sm plates, it does affect us.

To hold a 4-seat table (tight), against the wall, and have a passing distance around the table to reach the far side, you require 1.8M minimum. To allow for a chair on a 3rd table side You need to add another .3M, .6M if you want a passing zone while someone is occupying said chair.

I've generally indicated that if we're going to build balconies (and I like them) we should make them functional. I would prefer a minimum width to a maximum and would favour 2.4M at peak point. (which must be sustained, for a minimum length of 1.8M)

Minimum over all m2 should also apply. I would argue for 12m2/129ft2)
 

Back
Top