Brandon Donnelly — Daily insights for city builders. Published since 2013 by Toronto-based real estate developer Brandon Donnelly. — Page 251

It was not my intention to make this building code week on the blog, but for some reason that has happened. So let's continue. Here is an interesting guest essay -- about elevators -- written by Stephen Smith for the New York Times.

Stephen is the founder and executive director of a Brooklyn-based non-profit called the Center for Building in North America . And what they do is conduct research on building codes, specifically in the United States and Canada, and then advocate for reforms.

Here's what he thinks about elevators (taken from the above essay):

Elevators in North America have become over-engineered, bespoke, handcrafted and expensive pieces of equipment that are unaffordable in all the places where they are most needed. Special interests here have run wild with an outdated, inefficient, overregulated system. Accessibility rules miss the forest for the trees. Our broken immigration system cannot supply the labor that the construction industry desperately needs. Regulators distrust global best practices and our construction rules are so heavily oriented toward single-family housing that we’ve forgotten the basics of how a city should work.

Here's how the US compares to a few European countries:

Nobody is marveling at American elevators anymore. With around one million of them, the United States is tied for total installed devices with Italy and Spain. (Spain has one-seventh our population, 6 percent of our gross domestic product and fewer than half as many apartments.) Switzerland and New York City have roughly the same population, but the lower-rise alpine country has three times as many single-family houses as Gotham — and twice as many passenger elevators.

And here's a set of cost comparisons:

Behind the dearth of elevators in the country that birthed the skyscraper are eye-watering costs. A basic four-stop elevator costs about $158,000 in New York City, compared with about $36,000 in Switzerland. A six-stop model will set you back more than three times as much in Pennsylvania as in Belgium. Maintenance, repairs and inspections all cost more in America, too.

If you're interested in this topic, I would encourage you to give the full article a read . It's highly relevant to our ongoing discussions around missing middle housing. If cities, like Toronto , hope to build a lot more apartment buildings (especially smaller-scale ones), they are going to need affordable and plentiful elevator options.

(Thanks to Michael Visser for sharing this article me.)

Conrad Speckert got in touch with me following yesterday's post (about single-stair buildings) and he was kind enough to let me know that, this Thursday, Toronto Planning and Housing Committee will be considering this single exit stair item .

Included in the agenda item is a building code report that was done because City Council wanted to know if it were feasible to design multi-residential buildings up to four storeys that wouldn't be detrimental to human health.

Now that the report is done, one of the recommendations being put forward this week is for Toronto to create a guideline that would help people prepare alternative solution proposals under the Ontario Building Code.

Alternative solutions provide greater design flexibility. We almost always have them come up on our projects. In essence, they are a way of saying, "yeah, I know this design doesn't precisely meet the code, but it still satisfies its intent, and it works, so please approve it."

In this particular instance, the idea is to create a public-facing guideline so that more people will be able to figure out how to build 4-storey buildings with a single means of egress. Again, the current maximum is 2 storeys.

Four storeys isn't quite six storeys. But we're getting there. And it has become increasingly obvious that it is now just a question of when, not if. At some point, we won't be calling this an alternative solution proposal. It will just be -- the way.

Point access blocks (or single-stair buildings) are now an important part of today's discussions around housing supply in Canada. They are seen as a way to encourage more and different types of housing -- something we have been talking about on this blog for years. Here and here are two recent posts.

This week, I discovered the work of Conrad Speckert, who works at LGA Architectural Partners and has become a leading voice for this movement. Conrad completed his M.Arch at McGill University and, as part of his thesis project, he developed this website called Second Egress .

Since then it has grown to become a major resource for point access blocks. But most importantly, it has evolved into a catalyst for change. On April 18, 2022, he and David Hine (of David Hine Engineering) submitted this code change request to the Canadian Commission on Building and Fire Codes.

The ask: Allow a single means of egress for multi-unit residential buildings up to 6 storeys. (The current maximum is 2 storeys.) Well done, Conrad and David. This is a massively important request with far-reaching benefits, and so I would encourage all of you to check out his website and spread the word.

P.S. My second favorite part of his site is a section called Manual of Illegal Floor Plans . It's a catalog of highly livable single-stair buildings from around the world; all of which would be currently illegal to build in Canada.