A good layout can often make up for a small area and vice versa.

For example, my living room is over 400 sq.ft. and it's ridiculously overkill. There's enough space for an enclosed den in there easily.
 
Yeah, our last apartment had an amazing layout. Absolutely no wasted space. The only problem was no windows in the second bedroom or den (which was where our kid slept). He was really happy when we moved and he got his own window.
 
Glad to see developers adjusting and including more livable family-friendly units. Hopefully we see more of this in future proposals across the city.

I'll believe it when I see it. Too many times have developers said they are building "family friendly units" just for them to be laughable for a couple with a new born. I understand why developers stick with the mainly one bed plus den concepts with a couple of two bedrooms sprinkled in the mix as their return on investments are the highest this kinda senecio, but in order to create thriving "8-80 cities" we mustn't leave families and children outside of the urban core equation. Kids have a right to the city just as much as I do.

But for real the government needs to strengthen their incentives to develop multi (real) bedroom units, or make it more challenging to build primarily one bed buildings.
 
It's easy to live in an apartment with a newborn. In fact, it's ideal, as you can always see them from wherever you are and whatever you're doing. They don't need much space, other than a place to park a stroller (which is lacking in a lot of apartments, and especially stacked townhouses).

But once your kid gets to about 4-5 years old, the types of apartments you can largely find close to downtown do not really accommodate kids easily
 

SPA resubmission with the following stat changes:
  • Total residential units decreased from 375 to 362 (w/ redistributed unit mix);
  • Contemplated residential tenure changed from condominium to market-rate rental
  • Storey count reclassified from 50 to 51 due to introduction of another floor of indoor amenity in the mechanical penthouse
  • Height increased slightly from 171.6 to 172.67m
  • Total vehicular parking decreased from 46 to 45
  • Total bicycle parking decreased from 414 to 399
Additional architectural revisions listed below, from the cover letter:
1742918089005.png

1742918104248.png


Rendering & sample material board:
PLN - Architectural Plans - 4. Architectural Plans_29-39 Pleasant Blvd-compressed-0.jpg

PLN - Sample Material Board - 5. Digital Materials Board_29-39 Pleasant Blvd-1.jpg


OLT case for the appeal of the Minor Variance height boost remains open with no movement:
 

Another SPA resubmission with the following stat changes:
  • Total units increased from 362 to 370
  • Total vehicular parking decreased from 45 to 42
  • Total bicycle parking decreased from 399 to 211 (cash-in-lieu)
  • Minor GFA increase, unit mix redistribution
Additional revisions can be read in the cover letter

Updated renderings:
2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-140.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-142.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-144.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-141.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-143.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-2351.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-2352.jpg

2025-06-12_22080CS_Arch Set_Stamped- Resized-2353.jpg
 

Back
Top