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

[Civdis]

Such a classy development! This will age very well

 

[Rascacielo]

Today

 

[ADRM]

Somehow keeps getting better. Just so nicely detailed.

 

[UrbanAffair]

 

[daptive]

Will remove if this is a privacy issue! But some office space is already built out:

 

[officedweller]

Great looking signage!

 

[C-mac]

I hope when Forma is built it doesn't black this building to much because this thing is world class.

 

[DtTO]

This building is proof that Toronto developers need to ditch their obsession with balconies.

 

[C-mac]

This building is proof that Toronto developers need to ditch their obsession with balconies.

I don't know man. Aesthetically it looks better, but people buying want them.

 

[ProjectEnd]

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...

558sf in Toronto would be a 1+den or a small 2br.

 

[innsertnamehere]

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!

 

[Redroom Studios]

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.

 

[ProjectEnd]

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.

 

[Northern Light]

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)

 

[ProjectEnd]

The 1br I posted above has almost 250sf of outdoor space, augmented with these features. Toronto developers just...wouldn't.

It's worth noting, in that vein, that we're touching 260sf units here...