Toronto Architects Come Up With High-Design Solution To City's Housing Crisis
 

Toronto Architects Come Up With High-Design Solution To City's Housing Crisis


January 4th, 2021

By Mira Miller

Read More: https://www.blogto.com/real-estate-t...3hxXr2YRDRz4zU




https://i.imgur.com/8mi3g0k.jpg




https://i.imgur.com/RVciavQ.jpeg




https://i.imgur.com/8NTPYYi.jpg

Ridiculous. Way out of context for the neighborhood. You can have a similar density by placing a multi-story building with retail on a street corner, but silly to put it mid block like this.

I didn't like at all. Why not demolishing the house on the corner and build a similar, but proper midrise on the place?

The density concept is good, but do people really want to live in fishbowls?

concept: intriguing

execution: butt-fugly

It's just a 5-storey building replacing a 3-storey rowhouse unit - not exactly reinventing the wheel here. The built form & gentle increase in density is good, but the problem with this as a solution is that it still isn't actually allowed in most of the city. Streamline the approvals process and we'd see a lot more of this.

Those are badass! I’d live in one. Innovative thinking.

Soooo, a flat?

What is groundbreaking about this? lmfao.

Sidenote: Why is every city in a "Housing Crisis"? Me thinks this a politically manufactured problem.

Not too bad. They'd need curtains, of course, but any idea that gets more homeless people into homes is one worth considering.

Integrating new development into SFH nabes that's taller than the surrounding houses without it having to be in a designated highrise node or on a major thoroughfare is very unusual. Usually SFH neighbours are mostly off-limits to development other than replacing the odd house with a new house that's basically the same size. The only exceptions tend to be conventional lowrise apartment buildings but even they aren't in SFH nabes very often. And generally any upgrade in density would require a site much larger than one intended for a single house.

Looks terrible. For those low density residential neighbourhoods in the central city I'd much rather they concentrate on lane way housing. Besides, does Toronto really need to densify those streets? The vast majority of them are within walking distance of a major arterial road (high street) and those are being substantially intensified. Arterial roads like Bathurst, Bloor, St.Clair, Eglinton, College, Dundas, Queen, King, etc. are being re-worked from 2-4 floor buildings with retail at the bottom into 10-20 floor condos with retail at the bottom.

This is on an arterial, which is why it's even possible in the first place. A 5-storey multi-family dwelling on a back street would be flatly rejected by City Staff.

But to get to your point - intensifying those lower-density residential streets is important if we ever want to get serious about affordability or equitable urbanization.

As it stands, the vast majority of the city's land - all of the yellow area in the following image - is zoned exclusively for single family housing (including semis and rows) and duplex apartments. That's a lot of land that we're not making use of - land that has actually seen a decrease in population despite the city's booming population overall (due to declining household sizes & gentrification causing duplex/triplexes to be converted to SFH):

https://i.imgur.com/21AayZR.jpg


Secondly, this style of gentle intensification is useful because it is low cost and relatively easy to build. This creates an opportunity for small developers and entrepreneurial homeowners to develop their own properties, freeing the housing supply from being controlled exclusively by a small cartel of major condo developers, and thus creates more competition in the market. It also adds a new ground-oriented multi-family housing typology somewhere between the current extremes of large single family house or small high-rise condo unit - the "missing middle" that is essential for families who can't afford a SFH, but need more space than what the typical condo provides.

Thirdly, by expanding the amount of developable land, it reduces the pressure on the relatively small amount of land that is currently zoned for high density. This brings land prices down, and in particular enables the kinds of interesting, low-rise commercial strips that give our city character, a chance at survival. As it stands, we're losing so many small businesses because the land that they sit on has been so artificially inflated that they can no longer afford it.

By limiting development to the red, orange, and brown zones only, we run the risk of become a sort of two-tier city, whereby the majority of the population - poor people, young people, immigrants, etc. - are relegated to small apartments in overdeveloped slivers of land; while the wealthy minority occupy a vast, unchanging expanse of suburbia in the city. Building apartments in the "yellow belt" is the only way around this.

This would be improved so much if they had some blinds in those windows.

Awful and dehumanizing.

What on earth is dehumanizing about a 5-storey apartment building? :???:

And what could be more humanizing than homes for the homeless?

I’m confused by what is being proposed in this rendering. Is it being suggested that a developer acquire the two SFH lots on the open market and then divides them into three lots or are they suggesting to seize the strip of land between the houses and build such a structure. I can’t see any existing property owners being happy with the latter.

https://i.imgur.com/8mi3g0k.jpg

^ It's an empty lot between two houses.

This is pretty cool, anyway. It's basically a German Appartements Haus but turned sideways so it's oriented along the depth of the lot instead of the width. I didn't know the Canada building code allowed multifamily housing off a simple staircase. If they do, I have to wonder why anyone bothers with the horrible central corridor, one window wall design.

As for the scale, it's great. I also like how it addresses the lane and will contribute to the emergence of laneways as attractive public spaces. This would never happen, but I'd love to see Toronto allow five floors for laneway housing at least in one area. I think a tiered look on the front street would look good, and the urban environment in lanes built up like that would be incredible.

Does anyone know what street this is supposed to be on?

As Monkeyronin mentioned above it's supposed to be on an arterial so it wouldn't face the same issues as if it were actually on a side street. I'm guessing something like Harbord st based on the bike lanes, but could just as easily be parts of Gerrard E, College or Dundas. A lot of buildings on these streets already feature extensions to the back of the lotline, and I'm currently seeing a ton of new expansions on Roncessvalles doing just this.

Count me in with the camp that agrees with this in principle. It's not radically different from many places in the old portions of Toronto which are 2-3 storey buildings ("houses") containing between 3 - 4 apartments. The current one I live in extends back much further than the neighbourhing buildings which means we have a huge amount of space, but a significantly smaller backyard.

Design-wise something more conservative would probably be a better sell, as it distracts from the overall concept.