Recent content by IsaacKhouzam

To add insult to injury, the T9 also looks like this: Edit: It appears the first three pictures are of an adjacent tram line (T3A). Picture number four is T9 though.

It's embarrassing that there even exists a legitimate channel for opposing the construction of a three storey apartment building anywhere in a city of three million people.

Apologies if this has been posted already, but I just came across this and felt that it would be appreciated here. Anyone who is interested in the possibilities of urban change in Toronto should take a look: https://impossibletoronto.ca/

I don’t think the fact that developers are profit-driven precludes the possibility of cheaper units. By that logic prices would never go down in any sector! If costs (land, construction, development fees, etc.) went down and developers felt that there was a market for larger units at lower...

I don't expect this will change anybody's mind, but I'd like to chime in with some counter examples of 4+ storey buildings that make no attempt to "fit in" to lower-rise contexts and yet do not prevent their surrounding neighbourhoods from being vibrant and livable. See the following from New...

Compromise is not a dirty word, but neither is all compromise necessarily positive. I don't think you and I will agree on where the line should be drawn. For me, the changes to Burnaby's multiplex allowances as described in that article are a clear example of an obstruction against reasonable...

And yet despite all of that, we are still debating whether it is reasonable to object to the construction of four storey buildings in major cities. I'm enthusiastic about the changes you quoted, but it feels to me like we're still starting from the assumption that urbanism, density, etc. are...

Without a doubt; which is why I believe it's the role of everyone in planning, architecture, and building to work to convince people that urbanism doesn't have to be scary. Over time, I hope, public opinion can change. I don't think our milquetoast approach to urban change will ever accomplish that.

This sounds reasonable but doesn't reflect the reality of the situation. It is precisely those people who take such issue with living next to four-storey buildings who are imposing their preferences (for smaller buildings) on others (adjacent property owners). I am advocating for exactly the...

A planning regime that requires a three storey building to be present on a street first in order to justify a four storey building seems fundamentally broken or misguided to me. There should be nowhere in a medium or large city where four storeys is "out-sized and non-contextual." We're talking...

I don't think anybody was married to the idea of a massive structural wood cantilever, if that's what you're referring to. Speaking for myself, I was excited by the outward expression of the design: the warm, wood or wood-like cladding; the inclusion of greenery in the building facade; the way...

I really don't understand this attitude. Yes, there were a host of reasons that the previous design as shown would have been expensive to the point of being unbuildable. There are also a thousand ways it could have transformed it into something buildable without throwing out everything that made...

I think this is too generous. The architecture previously supported the big move in the site plan by matching it with an equally bold architectural move. A big 12-storey wall running along the south side of the site worked because the architecture embraced that as a feature and made something of...

From the September 24th issue of the Waterfront Toronto blog (https://www.waterfrontoronto.ca/news/whats-next-one-torontos-most-significant-housing-projects): "Alison Brooks Architects remains the lead architect for this block and sees this as an opportunity to create an even stronger design...

This is a failure of stunning proportions; everyone involved in delivering such a monumental dud - especially in light of the inspiring renderings previously published - should be embarrassed.