I live in a unit with a Juliet balcony (which I'd previously said I would never do as I viewed it as half-assed), and it's fine. I have more space within my apartment to use the 8 months of the year when a balcony would go unused and in the summer I just open the door and get a good breeze. No complaints.
 
sixrings said:
Lived in a unit without a balcony and would never do it again.
Click to expand...

Lived in a unit with a big balcony for 6 years and rarely had any use of it.
I guess it depends on what the balcony is facing. It is of little use to me because it faces some pretty noisy area, and in the summer, the outside ACs are very loud too. And there is no much view to see either.
 
torontologist said:
I'd take more floor space over a balcony any day. As things stand right now, the vast majority of new units are tiny floorplans with balconies. I would just like to be able to choose accordingly, as you said.
Click to expand...
Don't think GFA calcs include balcony areas, so if the tower is 750m2 already, then not having a balcony wouldn't make a difference to your interior area. Could be wrong tho
 
Last edited:
I'd be fine without a balcony if windows in modern buildings actually opened more than a crack.
 
If a deal is reached between the developer and the city ahead of the October-November OMB hearing, is it permissible for the developer to start marketing and selling units?
 
They can do this at any time. It's just an agreement with a deposit in good faith to buy the unit when the building is completed.
 
greenleaf said:
Final Report - Lower Yonge Precinct - City-Initiated Official Plan Amendment and Precinct Plan
Click to expand...

From the report (bolding mine):

Some of the key features contemplated for the Lower Yonge Precinct include: 13 towers; approximately 28,000 new residents and employees; a new community recreation centre; an elementary school; two child care facilities; affordable housing units; modifications to the Gardiner Expressway; a tunnel connection under the rail corridor; two new streets, enhanced cycling infrastructure and an extension of the PATH network.
Click to expand...

Huh. Surely extending Church St down isn't worth the effort, much as many of us would like to see it done. Is this just like a "well, maybe one day" kind of thing?
 
adHominem said:
Huh. Surely extending Church St down isn't worth the effort, much as many of us would like to see it done. Is this just like a "well, maybe one day" kind of thing?
Click to expand...

Maybe PATH to Backstage?
 
adHominem said:
From the report (bolding mine):



Huh. Surely extending Church St down isn't worth the effort, much as many of us would like to see it done. Is this just like a "well, maybe one day" kind of thing?
Click to expand...
At the public meetings this was surprisingly popular as way to connect the new neighbourhood with St Lawrence. I don't think anyone sees it as a 'must have' and there was talk of a pedestrian/cycling connection only but I guess we will see. (There is already a 'plan' - or an idea - of extending the PATH east from Backstage to Market Street.)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top