[Northern Light]

You have selected a typology that is particularly vulnerable to access issues (apartment tower) along with a clear deficiency in material selection that lead to the conflagration.

Yes, there were over 450 buildings in the UK with this cladding on their exterior at one point......so not a rarity.

A second egress wouldn't have changed a thing.

The public inquiry found the exact opposite. Perhaps you should read the report.

The strategy not to evacuate was based on the single egress, they were inextricably linked. The strategy failed.

The building was not designed with full evacuation in mind. Therefore the Fire Brigade sought to have residents remain in the building, while they fought the fire.

Once they realized the building would be lost, they pivoted, but it was too late.

 

[AlexBozikovic]

The British second stair regulations put in place after Grenfell only apply to buildings above 18 m, and they have been criticized as overkill and/or irrelevant. It’s a nuanced discussion.

Fire safety experts call for rethink over second staircases in letter to Gove

A group of 29 fire safety professionals have called on the government to scrap a requirement for new buildings taller than 18 metres to have a second staircase.

www.insidehousing.co.uk

 

[afransen]

I think it's fair to say that highrises should have second stairs. Midrises are another matter. Beyond affordability, single stair typologies would also support a broader range of unit types and sizes that are more livable that the bowling alley condo or bachelor shoe box.

 

[LukaMilo8]

I think it's fair to say that highrises should have second stairs. Midrises are another matter. Beyond affordability, single stair typologies would also support a broader range of unit types and sizes that are more livable that the bowling alley condo or bachelor shoe box.

Completely agree, if we want to build housing that's functional, dense and attractive, we need zoning to be more permissive with midrises. Furthermore I think number of units/residents should also be considered. There should be no reason why an 18m tall building with 30 residents and 150 residents should need to have the same staircase requirements.

 

[Northern Light]

I think it's fair to say that highrises should have second stairs. Midrises are another matter. Beyond affordability, single stair typologies would also support a broader range of unit types and sizes that are more livable that the bowling alley condo or bachelor shoe box.

I'm not inalterably opposed.

But........

The first thing to be said is that offsetting requirements for greater fire resistance and smoke mitigation.........mean that this will not likely result in greater affordability.

It may result in greater unit quality/variety/diversity.......which is desirable.

But we need to sell the change, on a safety-neutral basis for what it achieves, not what it does not.

The other thing here is to understand that there are other ways to achieve the same thing..............the blindness of developers to anything other than maximum profit is not something the rest of us need to mitigate.

 

[christiesplits]

A midtown multiplex plan is irking neighbours. Their issue: noise, traffic and the $2-million-per-unit price​

A midtown multiplex plan is irking neighbours. Their issue: noise, traffic and the $2-million-per-unit price

A Toronto developer whose plans for a midtown multiplex were shot down says he’s pushing ahead with a revised version of the $2-million-per-unit project.

www.thestar.com

Frank Taher, the CEO of GTA-based company 6ixGroup, plans to build a four-storey structure with four 1,500-square-foot condos at 40 Snowdon Ave., a leafy residential street north of Yonge Street and Lawrence Avenue, lined with mostly two-storey detached homes and semis.

The project has garnered opposition from neighbours, over the size and changes it will bring to the street, as well as from the local councillor, who argues the price point isn’t in keeping with the purpose the multiplex bylaw.

The fourplex went to the North York Committee of Adjustment in February, a tribunal that makes binding decisions under the Planning Act, and was rejected.

The committee ruled that the two requested variances, to exceed the allowed height and depth, were not minor. But Taher says they plan to go ahead with a revised design that won’t require variances, and will soon launch pre-construction sales.

Taher said the process to get approval to build has been awful — from the failed Committee of Adjustment process to the list of zoning deficiencies he said he was provided while trying to get the zoning certificate — and has filed complaints to the city.

“I’m super disappointed with City of Toronto, instead of helping us moving the cause they’re just pushing it back,” he said.

 

[Towered]

What about 4 stories as-of-right everywhere now??

 

[guavadelic]

What about 4 stories as-of-right everywhere now??

Same thing I was wondering about.

 

[Northern Light]

What about 4 stories as-of-right everywhere now??

Same thing I was wondering about.

He can get 4 storeys and he will......

He asked for variances beyond the as-of-right (more height in M than permitted) and a few other tweaks.

We could debate the merits of the asks, but set that aside.........he asked for stuff that was not as-of-right.............and got told 'no'.

He's now going to build anyway, without the variances..........

 

[Spooderman]

Hey everyone I just made an account even though I’ve been using urban Toronto for quite some time now. I have a genuine question: why doesn’t Toronto allow 4–6 storey walk-ups like NYC? Wouldn’t there be more benefits, like increased tax revenue? If they were built in close proximity to subway stations like Pape Station, which will eventually have two subway lines once the Ontario Line is complete it could bring a lot of positives. Compared to random tall high-rises in the middle of neighborhoods, these mid-rise buildings wouldn’t disrupt the vibe of a neighborhood. At the same time, they would increase ridership, which in turn helps maintain and expand public transportation. Maybe I’m missing something, since I only recently got into this urban planning stuff. But even texas, of all places, passed a bill legalizing 6-storey buildings with 4 units per floor. (1st photo nyc, 2nd Texas passed buildings, 3rd pape station)

 

[afransen]

Hey everyone I just made an account even though I’ve been using urban Toronto for quite some time now. I have a genuine question: why doesn’t Toronto allow 4–6 storey walk-ups like NYC? Wouldn’t there be more benefits, like increased tax revenue? If they were built in close proximity to subway stations like Pape Station, which will eventually have two subway lines once the Ontario Line is complete it could bring a lot of positives. Compared to random tall high-rises in the middle of neighborhoods, these mid-rise buildings wouldn’t disrupt the vibe of a neighborhood. At the same time, they would increase ridership, which in turn helps maintain and expand public transportation. Maybe I’m missing something, since I only recently got into this urban planning stuff. But even texas, of all places, passed a bill legalizing 6-storey buildings with 4 units per floor. (1st photo nyc, 2nd Texas passed buildings, 3rd pape station)View attachment 654396View attachment 654397View attachment 654398

Thanks for sharing!

Does NYC build much in the way of new walkups?

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Hey everyone I just made an account even though I’ve been using urban Toronto for quite some time now. I have a genuine question: why doesn’t Toronto allow 4–6 storey walk-ups like NYC? Wouldn’t there be more benefits, like increased tax revenue? If they were built in close proximity to subway stations like Pape Station, which will eventually have two subway lines once the Ontario Line is complete it could bring a lot of positives. Compared to random tall high-rises in the middle of neighborhoods, these mid-rise buildings wouldn’t disrupt the vibe of a neighborhood. At the same time, they would increase ridership, which in turn helps maintain and expand public transportation. Maybe I’m missing something, since I only recently got into this urban planning stuff. But even texas, of all places, passed a bill legalizing 6-storey buildings with 4 units per floor. (1st photo nyc, 2nd Texas passed buildings, 3rd pape station)View attachment 654396View attachment 654397View attachment 654398

Along with mixed-use buildings, especially at bus & streetcar stops, and "metro" stations.

 

[Towered]

Hey everyone I just made an account even though I’ve been using urban Toronto for quite some time now. I have a genuine question: why doesn’t Toronto allow 4–6 storey walk-ups like NYC? Wouldn’t there be more benefits, like increased tax revenue? If they were built in close proximity to subway stations like Pape Station, which will eventually have two subway lines once the Ontario Line is complete it could bring a lot of positives. Compared to random tall high-rises in the middle of neighborhoods, these mid-rise buildings wouldn’t disrupt the vibe of a neighborhood. At the same time, they would increase ridership, which in turn helps maintain and expand public transportation. Maybe I’m missing something, since I only recently got into this urban planning stuff. But even texas, of all places, passed a bill legalizing 6-storey buildings with 4 units per floor. (1st photo nyc, 2nd Texas passed buildings, 3rd pape station)View attachment 654396View attachment 654397View attachment 654398

Perhaps one of the obstacles is that any building 4 storeys or taller requires an elevator, but I'm just speculating.

 

[Northern Light]

Hey everyone I just made an account even though I’ve been using urban Toronto for quite some time now. I have a genuine question: why doesn’t Toronto allow 4–6 storey walk-ups like NYC? Wouldn’t there be more benefits, like increased tax revenue? If they were built in close proximity to subway stations like Pape Station, which will eventually have two subway lines once the Ontario Line is complete it could bring a lot of positives. Compared to random tall high-rises in the middle of neighborhoods, these mid-rise buildings wouldn’t disrupt the vibe of a neighborhood. At the same time, they would increase ridership, which in turn helps maintain and expand public transportation. Maybe I’m missing something, since I only recently got into this urban planning stuff. But even texas, of all places, passed a bill legalizing 6-storey buildings with 4 units per floor. (1st photo nyc, 2nd Texas passed buildings, 3rd pape station)

@Towered is on point above, you are required to include an elevator for any building greater than 3s in height. The requirement is for accessibility and safety.

So a 4s walk-up is a 'no'.

We can design equally attractive and we can do it a workable price point...........but we can't do it without elevators, and I think that's perfectly reasonable. We can't leave a huge chunk of the population unable to live in or visit tenants/owners in new mulit-unit builds.

 

[DavidCapizzano]

Beautiful, livable and bricky low rise inspo. Wish this was more common and encouraged in Toronto neighbourhoods.