Before the development brief is fixed.

An architectural feasibility checklist for developers assessing mixed-use and multi-residential sites in Toronto and the GTA.

Jahan Mehr Architects

Questions to resolve

What is the development objective and intended tenure?
Which site and planning assumptions are verified?
How do massing options translate into usable floor plans?
Can residential, commercial and service functions work together?
Which investigations and consultants are needed next?
What must be resolved before acquisition or the next financing milestone?

Separate objectives from assumptions.

Begin with the developer’s intended programme: rental or condominium housing, commercial uses, target unit mix, shared amenities and any phasing. Record the decisions that are firm and the ones the study is expected to test. A density target alone is not a complete architectural brief.

Gather a current survey, available drawings, planning history and known site constraints. The study should distinguish information that has been checked from information supplied by others or still awaiting investigation. That distinction makes the resulting options more useful to the wider development team.

Test the building behind the massing.

A compelling envelope needs workable floor plates. Review cores, circulation, unit depths, structure and servicing while comparing massing options. For mixed-use development, examine how residential and commercial entrances, deliveries, waste handling and building services coexist.

Low-rise, mid-rise and high-rise proposals ask different questions about their relationship with the street and adjacent properties. Consider those relationships alongside the internal programme, rather than treating the public realm as a later finishing layer.

Make the tradeoffs visible.

Compare a small number of meaningful alternatives. A useful comparison explains what changes: unit mix, usable area, building depth, circulation, amenity provision, servicing or the relationship between uses. Keep area definitions consistent so the developer and consultants can compare like with like.

Architectural feasibility informs the financial model; it does not replace cost, market, planning or legal advice. Identify the assumptions that need input from the appropriate specialist before an option becomes the basis of an acquisition or investment decision.

End with a coordinated next step.

The output should identify the preferred direction, unresolved questions, required investigations and the consultant input needed to advance. Match the next design stage to the developer’s actual decision milestone, with a clear scope and information list.

JMA’s published portfolio includes 5280 Dundas Street West and 316 Campbell Avenue. Their project pages explain the development programme and architectural work in context. For a new site, the useful starting point is its specific conditions and objectives, rather than assuming that a previous project’s density or approval path will transfer.

Prepare for a conversation

Bring the information you have.

Address, current survey and available drawings
Known planning history and site investigations
Intended tenure, programme and unit mix
Acquisition or development milestones
Existing consultant reports and contact roles