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

The area where the new building is to go has been closed off. Much of that area was previously occupied by the sales pavilion and ancillary areas. The main parking lot, alongside where Captain John's used to be, appeared to still be in use. Not sure how much of the parking area was actually shut down when the fencing for the construction site was put up.
 
Is it likely that the building will be "spandrelated"?
I'm asking cause the renderings show clear transparent class behind the fritted balconies.
If it turns out like that it will look amazing.
 
biospherian said:
Is it likely that the building will be "spandrelated"?
I'm asking cause the renderings show clear transparent class behind the fritted balconies.
If it turns out like that it will look amazing.
Click to expand...

It definitely will!
All condo buildings approved in the last few years are subjected to the new energy code standards which limits glazing to 40% of the building's exterior walls.
It can be sure that any marketing renderings, depending on when it was approved, won't represent what will be actually be built as much of the glass shown will be spandrel or some kind of solid cladding. Purchase agreements are carefully crafted to allow developers to get away with such material changes.
Luckily this building is relying purely on its wraparound balcony articulation as its design feature which will hopefully help hide the amount of spandrel panels that is required.
That being said, there will be lots of disappointing condo builds in the next years as marketing renderings are conceptual in nature and rarely show what exactly is going to be built.
 
40% is the maximum for the bare minimum. Doesn't mean a project can't go above it as unlikely as that would be.
 
innsertnamehere said:
you are allowed around it if you use curtian wall. So if they do that, they could avoid it.
Click to expand...

I always thought the limit was on any vision glass, but I'm glad that's not the case; a push towards curtainwall is exactly what Toronto needs. I never understood why Toronto uses so much window wall for residential buildings. Even looking at Montreal, the majority of their new condos are curtainwall.

Do you happen to have a link to these new regulations?
 
DtTO said:
I always thought the limit was on any vision glass, but I'm glad that's not the case; a push towards curtainwall is exactly what Toronto needs. I never understood why Toronto uses so much window wall for residential buildings. Even looking at Montreal, the majority of their new condos are curtainwall.

Do you happen to have a link to these new regulations?
Click to expand...

It's not just Toronto. Look at Vancouver, Florida, etc. Any established, booming high rise residential market has their share of window wall.
 
yes, you could use a high performance window wall system, like a curtain wall, in lieu of complying to the maximum 40% vision glass requirement, but developers are most likely not willing to spend that kind of money (likewise with other high performance mechanical systems).
A curtain wall system is not an ideal cladding system for a building that has wraparound balconies.
 
Last edited:
neuhaus said:
A curtain wall system is not an ideal cladding system for a building that has wraparound balconies.
Click to expand...

More reasons to get rid of this unfortunate trend. Buildings like Exhibit actually have fake balconies. I don't understand why anyone would willingly want a balcony that blocks their view 100% of the time for the one or two times per year that they'll actually "use" it. I'm surprised there isn't a consumer push for a common terrace and balcony-less units.
 
DtTO said:
More reasons to get rid of this unfortunate trend. Buildings like Exhibit actually have fake balconies. I don't understand why anyone would willingly want a balcony that blocks their view 100% of the time for the one or two times per year that they'll actually "use" it. I'm surprised there isn't a consumer push for a common terrace and balcony-less units.
Click to expand...

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.
 
neuhaus said:
.... in lieu of complying to the minimum 40% vision glass requirement......
Click to expand...

If I am not mistaken, should that not read: maximum 40% vision glass requirement?

If 40% is the minimum, to me that would imply that anything in the range of 40% to 100% vision glass would be acceptable to the City....
 
DtTO said:
More reasons to get rid of this unfortunate trend. Buildings like Exhibit actually have fake balconies. I don't understand why anyone would willingly want a balcony that blocks their view 100% of the time for the one or two times per year that they'll actually "use" it.
Click to expand...
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
 
AHK said:
If I am not mistaken, should that not read: maximum 40% vision glass requirement?
If 40% is the minimum, to me that would imply that anything in the range of 40% to 100% vision glass would be acceptable to the City....
Click to expand...

Yes, that was a typo. I meant maximum.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top