ArchDaily | Broadcasting Architecture Worldwidethe world's most visited architecture website

Sign up now and start saving and organizing your favorite architecture projects and photos


Find the most inspiring products for your projects in our Product Catalog.


Get the ArchDaily Chrome Extension and be inspired with every new tab. Install here »

  1. ArchDaily
  2. Projects
  3. Houses
  4. Canada
  5. superkül inc
  6. 2006
  7. Home_Office / superkül inc

Home_Office / superkül inc

  • 01:00 - 23 May, 2009
Home_Office / superkül inc
Home_Office / superkül inc

Home_Office / superkül inc Home_Office / superkül inc Home_Office / superkül inc Home_Office / superkül inc +11

  • Architects

  • Location

    Toronto, ON, Canada
  • Architects

    superkül inc
  • Principals

    Andre D’Elia and Meg Graham
  • Structural Engineer

    Robert E. Brown Associates
  • Mechanical Engineer

    Keynon Mechanical Design Inc
  • General Contractor

    Keystone Construction with Andre D'Elia and Meg Graham
  • Area

    260.0 sqm
  • Project Year


From the architect. Home / Office is a live-work building at the triangular intersection of Roncesvalles and Dundas Street West, in a modest strip of mixed-use buildings that edge High Park and Parkdale. Originally a two storey building with a shop on the ground fl oor and an apartment above, it had in the recent past been used solely as a residence. Its conversion to Home / Office involved its wholesale renovation and the addition of a third fl oor to create a studio for the owners' architectural practice on the ground and basement fl oors and their apartment on the second and third fl oors.

Because of its mixed-use program, the tight project budget and existing zoning regulations, the only place for the project was a main street. This main street location works well with the City's new Offi cial Plan, which sees these streets in coming decades absorbing the city's projected increase in retail, offi ce and service employment, as well as much of its new housing. The density and height of buildings along these streets are much as they were a hundred years ago; for reasons of social, economic and environmental sustainability, and considering shifting live-work patterns, they are now especially ripe for revitalization and intensifi cation. And so the project is an exercise in the type of infi ll the City aims to encourage.

The massing and height of the building take their cues from adjacent fabric, as do window proportions and window heights; the materials of the project evoke those of both its commercial and residential neighbours, tying it into the streescape.

The building is currently divided almost equally between home and offi ce space but is designed to be adaptable; with small changes to the circulation and the partitioning, Home / Offi ce is easily converted to a different proportion of uses and units. The conscious decision to design the building in this way better ensures a fl exibility of use and occupation over the long-term, and so its vitality as a piece of Toronto's urban fabric.

Cite: "Home_Office / superkül inc" 23 May 2009. ArchDaily. Accessed . <>
Read comments


Joshua · June 04, 2009

@ Gregg and Reger

If you open the first floor plan, you'll notice a key. Number 7 on the second floor is indeed a study. The bedrooms are currently on the third floor, though the article states that it could change. It helps to actually look at the drawings.

Bo Lucky · June 02, 2009

My comments are based on what I see and read here plus what's available on the web. I guess these buildings are not designated or, if evaluated(?), they are designated "not heritage". Is that so? I have no problem with the building layout. I think it is very well designed and I would like to have a home/office like that myself. However I am wondering what inspired an architect to design this elevation? May this be the old facade with a new cladding? Why these materials? The pictures show the Home/Office placed between two red brick(?) buildings. The rest of the street appears to have similar color scheme. Has architect considered an issue of a harmony with the neighbors or search inspiration somewhere else? I do not now all constrains of the project so my judgment may be not entirely accurate, but I hope you understand where I am coming from?

Lindsay · June 02, 2009

Thank you Meg, you made my day!

Meg · June 02, 2009

Not quite Bo - the buildings to the left of Home/Office were built in the 80s, and the signage from the movie was made up; the re-facade of Home/Office for example was very faithful reproduction of a building in Eerie, Pennsylvania - had nothing to do with Toronto. You should take a look at what's really here sometime, Bo. Not much to write home about, and much of it in poor condition; that's why it lent itself to being remade as as stage set - in many ways it is a blank canvas. Except for Home/Office of course.

Bo Lucky · June 01, 2009

Thank you Meg, you made my day!
So, the film makers recognized historic character of the street and "restored" it temporarily to the film needs and our architects are distructed by the ugly signs (or may be blinded with egos?). Not being able to see values behind the signage they harmonized the building with it? Great!!!

Meg · June 01, 2009

Bo - that photo was taken in the Fall of 2006, when the street was made up to look like 1962 Baltimore for the remake of the movie Hairspray, with John Travolta and Zac Efron. All of the building signage, window signage, and the facade of Home/Office were part of a larger stage set.

Lindsay · May 28, 2009

There is a superabundance of buildings like these in Toronto. But more importantly, Bo, your panorama shows the building superkule re-faced - and its profile is nearly identical to the original.

Bo Lucky · May 28, 2009

Is this Toronto Dundas Street West? Is this a "nothing historic" neighborhood of this building? Am I missing anything?

Alex · May 28, 2009

Bo, I'm from Toronto and know where this project is. There is nothing "historic" about the structures around it.

Bo Lucky · May 27, 2009

Some posts in this discussion clearly indicate that there is an urgent need for a conservation architect in architectural teams engaged within historic quarters, especially those neglected and still waiting for a sensitive restoration, renovation or upgrade. It is frightning to read such comments from architects(?)...

Daniel Con · May 27, 2009

Am I missing something?? This facade seems pretty humble compared to the glowing neon storefronts adjacent. It would be nice if the neighboring buildings would clean their facades of signage so that the "historical" architecture could be read, then maybe you would have an argument that this design is out of place, but I dont see any architectural quality worth recognizing here. This doesn't look like a historical district, what is worth conserving?

Dariusz · May 26, 2009

Conservation?what is there to conserve? 1950's ugly non-architecture? let's bring in the new ! Good work guys..

Bo Lucky · May 26, 2009

Grass is always greener on the other side of the fence. Vancouver is doing great - no wonder it's one of the nicest cities in Canada. Toronto too. Evaluation (or for that matter construction too) of a building according to a personal taste leads nowhere as... each of us have a different taste. I don't know whether the Home Office elevation meets municipal standards or not and I will not speculate. I may however mention that I saw intelligently constructed infills that blends nicely between existing structures (no matter if heritage or not) augmenting visual quality of the entire street without shouting "here I am, look at me". And by the way... I am almost sure that if the architect was not restricted, the building would likely be much higher...

Lindsay · May 26, 2009

@Bo Lucky: I think it's a great addition to that streetscape, which is a combination of 2 and 3 story buildings if I remember correctly - the height is about the same as the building over to the right, isn't it? Toronto is doing a much better job of being adventurous - and not in a sloppy way - than we are in Vancouver, where nothing is allowed - the city planners are "heritage" oriented and, while consulting with conservation architects, consistently allow developers to build poor mimicry of older buildings, like a low-rent museum of a time that in fact never existed. This seems much more vibrant than that.

viniruski · May 26, 2009

This might be a strange thing for a born+raised Vancouverite, but I really want to move to T.Dot.

Fino · May 25, 2009

I noticed that about Toronto. They have mastered making exquisite contemporary spaces out of old structures. I visited an old brewery that was converted into a tasteful artist district without ever destroying the preexisting context of the old buildings. As a matter of fact, I could tell that the city really took pride in the methods to reuse and recycle, whether it was trash or architecture....or for some you....the same thing. Ha

that is all.

Bo Lucky · May 25, 2009

@Lucas Grey
I was referring neither to the building which was replaced nor to a new building function (which is fine). It's the elevation that I have a problem with. It is designed with no regards for the neighbourhood. Only height (which is likely result of municipal height restrictions) "connects" this building to its setting. The rest "stands out" ruining the climate of this place.
I was in Toronto couple of times, but this has no relevance to the subject we are discussing. I have nothing against modern design as long as it respects the place it is proposed for.

Lucas Gray · May 25, 2009 looks to me like the street is still there. Maybe there isn't a storefront that is open but in the description it mentioned that the previous building was used a single residence so it wasn't an active street facade. They did an fine job relating to the scale of the neighborhood. Why should all offices have to be removed from engaging the street? Where should they go? All offices should move to high rises or above retail stores?

Have you ever been to Toronto? Many historic or older neighborhoods have plenty of buildings that aren't worth preserving and injecting a contemporary design into a historic context can be quite captivating.

Bo Lucky · May 25, 2009

Answer to Lucas Grey question: streetscape (historic climate of the street).

Lucas Gray · May 25, 2009

What exactly was worth preserving here? It seems like they replaced a run of the mill two story building.

Its a nice project.

Greg · May 25, 2009

My bad, comment retracted.

Reger · May 25, 2009

How do u go to the bedrooms?
are we looking the same plan?

Greg · May 25, 2009

The plan notes that the room past the kitchen is a study, not a bedroom.

@Bo Lucky
conservation architects are BOOOORRRRING

Reger · May 25, 2009

You have to go across the kitchen, then u can go to sleep.
No thanx.

Bo Lucky · May 25, 2009

As a home office it really is superkul. As an addition to this specific streetscape it is a disaster. Don't you guys in Toronto have conservation guidelines for the older city quarters? If not... there is a profession called "conservation architect"... sometimes it is beneficial to consult a guy like that...

Fino · May 23, 2009

I think I saw this when I was in Toronto last year. It would be my dream workspace! Very nice, and a good affordable beginning for any new small firm.

that is all.


Comments are closed

Read comments

家_办公室 / superkül inc