Toronto Tower at Pier 27 | 114.9m | 35s | Cityzen | a—A

[DtTO]

I'm not 100% certain that this is what you mean by "fake balconies", but are you calling them that because you believe that people behind the balcony guards can't see through them? While the glass does have a large frit, the view from behind it is only partially obscured. The beauty of a dense frit is that from a distance it hides objects on the balcony to the eyes of passersby, giving the building a smoother appearance. Close up to the glass, however, people on the balcony can see through the frit-less grid around the dots. With just a small movement of your head when looking through a grid of frit that you're likely only a metre or two from, your brain will stitch together the whole scene beyond the glass: you won't feel you're missing anything. Meanwhile, the frit itself is translucent if not transparent, so a dark area is not being created behind the balcony guards, but one that's got a soft glow.

42

Sorry, I was actually referring to what look like fake balconies, but I could be wrong. I saw them from the ROM. It looks like they are just the balcony walls with no floor to stand on, perhaps meant to make the building look more uniform?

This is what I was referring to:

 

[interchange42]

Yup, those are fake balconies on the side that faces Museum House, and yes they create a uniform look for the building. They also provide some privacy in that section where there's little space between the two buildings, but again, one can see through frit when one is close to it, while it becomes more opaque the further that one gets from it.

EDIT: To bring this back to The Tower at Pier 27, we can expect either fritted glass or perforated metal balconies here, not sure which now since the perforated metal seems to have been so successful at Harbour Plaza Residences (by the same architect). Either will allow those behind the balconies a good view still, while benefitting from some privacy at the same time.

42

 

[Christopher Brown]

I have lived in a condo with a common terrace and no balconies since 2009. I now find myself wanting my own balcony and a gas hookup for my own BBQ just so that I don't have to share the outdoor space and amenities with neighbours. I agree with you that most condo balconies as they are currently built are next to useless, but I would gladly give up part of my view for actual usable private outdoor space where I don't have to wait around for seating and BBQ space to free up. I think reasoning like this may be why we're not seeing a push for balcony-less units. The existence of a balcony ticks off a box on the condo grocery list, and people don't really realize how useless the space is going to be until after the building is up and they've moved in.

We've been living in Maple Leaf Square, waiting on the delivery of our new condo in '18. This 2 bdm unit has a wide balcony stretching the entire length, probably 35 + ft. I have been on it precisely twice.

There is a floor and there is a ceiling. I would much rather have 120 + sq. ft. of what would be essentially free living space if the floor to ceiling windows were shoved out to where the balcony railing. That to me would represent, in this climate, on days like today in December through until May, a much more sensible use of concrete, glass and space. About $100,000 of lost living area or unattainable living area, depending on your perspective. Paid for, can't use. Makes no sense to me since I don't smoke and we can't bbq.

 

[maestro]

You have exclusive rights because of access being through your unit but, balconies don't belong to you. It's definitely debatable on the $100,000 of lost living space and paid for, can't use perspective. They don't factor in allowable density either.

 

[Christopher Brown]

You have exclusive rights because of access being through your unit but, balconies don't belong to you. It's definitely debatable on the $100,000 of lost living space and paid for, can't use perspective. They don't factor in allowable density either.

Yup, I get all that. But the only difference between the inside of the unit (@$700 psf avg.) and the outside of the unit is the location of the glass. I'm not suggesting one could move it. I'm merely stating a preference to, instead of storing crap and bikes and a few chairs there, I'd wave my magic wand, push the glass wall out and presto, capture all that lost and wasted space. I think these wraparound balconies are a bizzare and impractical use of air in a climate that has 4-5 months of decent short sleeve weather. I think most people, if asked, would choose a bigger living area over a enormous porch/open storage locker in the sky. But, everyone's different.

 

[innsertnamehere]

the big difference is that balconies do not count to maximum floorplate sizes and density calculations. It's "free" space for developers when it comes to developers, while pushing those windows out for the extra space increases the project density, reducing the amount of units you can put on the site.

 

[Edward Skira]

It's "free" space for developers when it comes to developers, while pushing those windows out for the extra space increases the project density, reducing the amount of units you can put on the site.

Remove the balconies completely and the density remains the same while the cost of construction goes down with hopefully some of that passed on to the purchasers. The developers would go for this. However most consumers want a balcony (even if they barely use them) so the developers are forced to offer them.

 

[innsertnamehere]

yup. Ultimately most people won't buy a condo without one. I probably wouldn't. Mind you I far prefer a balcony with a bit of depth to actually comfortably fit a couple of chairs and a table than what a lot of developers are building these days - metre deep spaces that are barely more than Juliets.

 

[Edward Skira]

I live in an 80's condo that had solariums and no balconies. Most of the solariums in the units were removed over the years by the individual owners. That's what happened in my unit and I don't regret it. The extra space is valuable. If I need to get outside the building has three large shared decks with bbq's, chairs, tables etc. The best of both worlds.

 

[tripwire]

I like developments where gas lines are incorporated into the balconies. That makes the whole legality of whether you can have a BBQ (electric or propane) on the balcony a moot point. Per innsertnamehere's post above, I also value a balcony that is relatively deep (6+ feet). taking this back to Piery 27 tower, I really like that parts of the balcony here will be really deep! In some of the units that I was interested in, it went as far as 10+ feet deep! That's really awesome!, of course, with the way they designed the balcony, you do have weird triangular corners which are fairly useless. But I'll take that con for the otherwise really big balcony spacing.

I think I mentioned this before in another thread, but I love Lumon's concept of enclosing balconies and terraces. I can only hope that this catches on, as it's the best of both worlds - you can have extra enclosed space, or an open area as per weather and personal preference.

 

[TheKingEast]

Unless you have a deep balcony with a BBQ hookup, balconies are pretty useless, especially if they're on higher floors. I laugh at condo units 50 storeys up with frilly little balconies that are completely useless. With how tight things are for space these days, I'd opt for a juliette balcony with the balcony space being converted to interior space.

 

[Migos]

Remove the balconies completely and the density remains the same while the cost of construction goes down with hopefully some of that passed on to the purchasers. The developers would go for this. However most consumers want a balcony (even if they barely use them) so the developers are forced to offer them.

I agree. It's like pools. Hardly anybody uses them in my experience but they're a great sales tool. A lot of the condo market is about buying a lifestyle and things like balconies, pools, etc. build on that idea even if unpractical in reality.

All that said, I have a balcony and use it all the time and wouldn't buy a condo without one. I also smoke though so that has a big impact on the usage. It's nice to have some private outdoor space in the warmer months and the views are also great from my balcony but not inside my unit.

 

[Bogtrotter]

I wouldn't buy a unit without a balcony. We don't sit out there for great lengths of time, sometimes with our morning coffee. But from Spring to mid-fall we fill it with plants- looks great through our sliding doors. Also great to have that large screen door to catch a breeze...or when you burn toast

 

[innsertnamehere]

again, the problem is that you cannot simply "convert" exterior balcony space into interior living room space. The trade off isn't a 600 square foot unit with a 100 square foot balcony or a 700 square foot unit with no balcony.. it is 600 sq ft with balcony or 600 sq ft without balcony.

 

[ADRM]

As the discussion above illuminates, there's no unanimity in this debate (shockingly), and presumably a vast many more never give two thoughts about it -- for those reasons, it's surprising to me that we don't see more buildings with a mix of units that do have balconies and those that don't (i.e. corresponding to a different design treatment on different parts of the building).

I've heard multiple developers in the city say that they have trouble selling units without balconies in this city, though I do wonder how much of that is self-fulfilling prophecy.

Frank Gehry, for his part, has said that not including provisioning for balconies for every unit at Mirvish + Gehry was at first seen as a non-starter for his design.