Toronto Artistry Condos | 103.5m | 29s | Tribute | Graziani + Corazza

The trees on the NW corner of Dundas & St Patrick are now gone. These pics are Saturday June 19, the few trees with a bit of height and leftover trunks were taken down the next day as well - only the shrubs with a 5' height are left.

PXL_20210619_222507336.jpgPXL_20210619_222530847.jpgPXL_20210619_222559242.MP.jpgPXL_20210619_222636385.MP.jpgPXL_20210619_222721202.jpg
 
What a disgrace and a great shame condos are really ruining this city's beauty at this rate all i see is grey towers and empty units sold out to foreign investors no wonder this city is losing its architecture identity architects like this lack any sort of creativity let alone understand real architecture beauty either with this city is slowly becoming more dystopian and depressing within time every condo build in the pass 20-30 years gonna look like the projects of Chicago by 2050 but even worse. i know that sounds harsh but at this point i have witness over 100 historic buildings being set on fire torn down or completely gentrified within a decade. I understand this city is evolving but is it going in the right direction?
 
RonnyIsGreat said:
What a disgrace and a great shame condos are really ruining this city's beauty at this rate all i see is grey towers and empty units sold out to foreign investors no wonder this city is losing it's architecture identity architects like this lack any sort of creativity let alone understand real architecture beauty either with this city is slowly becoming more dystopian and depressing within time every condo build in the pass 20-30 years gonna look like the projects of Chicago by 2050 but even worse. i know that sounds harsh but at this point i have witness over 100 historic buildings being set on fire torn down or completely gentrified within a decade. I understand this city is evolving but is it going in the right direction?
Click to expand...

oooh, some flame balls for your first posts.

We need more housing of all kinds as far as I can tell. Every time the police forcibly remove people from living in tents because the city/province/feds will not help build enough housing is what is dystopian. We are already living in it. It is already depressing.

Some new housing will look nice, some won’t, just like the old stuff that was built.
 
What some developers do/get away with borders on cultural criminality. This city desperately needs a “Save The Brick” campaign for anything older than 75 years….especially over 100! I propose a final approval panel for any and all projects where existing buildings are in jeopardy. It is to be made up of elegant elderly ladies with piles of blue rinsed hair done up in a severe bun and cat eye glasses on pearl neck chains with a discreet tissue tucked up the sleeve of their sensible cardigan and wearing long sensible skirts or dresses. All members must be at least 80 years of age. They have total and ultimate approval at final confirmation of any development where an older building exists and decide which building survives. Btw….ALL developers must attend ANY hearing for future educational purposes and each lady will carry a fly swatter and a leather shaving strap to maintain order and ensure compliance to the city’s historical memory. If you own a historical property you ignore…..automatic WOODSHED! 😉
 
Last edited:
dusk said:
What I find particularly maddening is that making a condo look respectable and fairly attractive does not cost more money.
Click to expand...
EXACTLY. Just because we need more housing, doesn't mean we have to degrade the city with ugly, generic, grey boxes. We can build new housing that doesn't consist of ugly, generic, spandrel disasters.
 
To me most of all, two things make me sad here. One, the old heritage red/brown brick stock being demolished, but two the fact that the Church feels snugly in place there and this new grey thing will block that from Dundas and South. There is something to say about context, and in this case the church structures contextually just really felt right.

Obviously the new building looks like it will be a major miss also, and it is so prominently placed near the AGO and OCAD, with their interesting shapes and colours.
 
ceaz40 said:
What some developers do/get away with borders on cultural criminality. This city desperately needs a “Save The Brick” campaign for anything older than 75 years….especially over 100! I propose a final approval panel for any and all projects where existing buildings are in jeopardy. It is to be made up of elegant elderly ladies with piles of blue rinsed hair done up in a severe bun and cat eye glasses on pearl neck chains with a discreet tissue tucked up the sleeve of their sensible cardigan and wearing long sensible skirts or dresses. All members must be at least 80 years of age. They have total and ultimate approval at final confirmation of any development where an existing older building exists and decide which building survives. Btw….ALL developers must attend ANY hearing for future educational purposes and each lady will carry a fly swatter and a leather shaving strap to maintain order and ensure compliance to the city’s historical memory. if you own a historical property you ignore…..automatic WOODSHED! 😉
Click to expand...
Sounds like a nimby panel.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top