Why is landscaping/landscape architecture an afterthought in Toronto developments?

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Just throwing it out there - why is it that the landscaping/landscape architecture is often so awful in Toronto? We've seen development after development where it's been poorly designed, executed and maintained.

AoD

 

[christiesplits]

Re: private developments

I imagine that most purchasers - outside of UT, of course - place the interior, amenities and location as a more important factor in their purchase. For those interested in the architecture and design, I reckon the structure in and of itself, including the shape, cladding, etc. are of more importance than the landscaping. Developers take heed, and strive for mediocrity.

Limited requirements and oversight by the city likely plays a role too.

 

[44 North]

Some examples would be good. Public, or private, or Section 37-type projects? And do you mean like the design of paths and how things meet the street, faded paint, or sod that's sun-scorched and dead a few days after being lain?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Some examples would be good. Public, or private, or Section 37-type projects? And do you mean like the design of paths and how things meet the street, faded paint, or sod that's sun-scorched and dead a few days after being lain?

Private - the general malaise around public realm is already well established. It could issues like what you've raised - but also general lackadaisical approach towards plantings and general landscaping/landscape design. More often than not it's an afterthought.

AoD

 

[44 North]

Yeah, I can think of one that annoyed me recently. There was nice manicured lawn on a berm, with a statue as the centrepiece, but in order for the dozens of dogwalkers and residents to access it they had to climb a steep rutted dirt path. And the front lawn of the building was basically dirt and mulch that turns into a mudslide that washes onto the street when it rains. And it isn't just aesthetics with some of these things, but access. If you have mobility issues or a stroller, it's as if you're not wanted in the building.

 

[junctionist]

It's strange given that most developments are aimed at middle class consumers, who generally invest in landscaping as homeowners. Too many developments have mediocre landscaping consisting of a lawn, a generic concrete retaining wall, boring low-maintenance perennials and some token trees.

 

[Transportfan]

^Most people, environmentalists being an exception, don't want to plant jungles on their property.

 

[lead82]

It's an after thought because not enough people care. Most people don't appreciate these things or like it when they are tourists but don't demand the same standards back home.

We are slowly improving the public realm. Blood looks a lot better now than 5 years ago. Qeens Quay is huge improvement. East Bayfront /Sugar Beach are all great examples. There are more projects on the pipeline such as Yonge St and John St cultural corridor. Would be great if we could make Yonge and John both pedestrian streets with bike lanes, trees, patios and wider side walks.

My hope is that things are changing for the better, albeit slowly.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Oddly enough, I generally don't find the landscaping on private developments all that terrible. I'm just happy to see anything. The occasionally stand-out landscape design is a treat.

Most major global cities don't have the luxury of much landscaping at all, as most developments are part of street walls. Many developments are incorporating their 1% for art contributions as part of the landscaped frontage/setback.

 

[CDL.TO]

I think there's a broader conversation about societal priorities. We can see this in the governments we elect. There's a sense that capital costs are worthwhile while operating costs constitute wasting money.

People want to see cheap landscaping that lowers operating costs, keeping taxes and condo fees low.

Another suspicion I have relates to just how autocentric expertise is in North America. For the typical, run-of-the-mill architectural firm, they have simply forgotten how to design landscaping that is appealing and functional for pedestrians. Look at the complete failure to understand the simple concept of desire paths in landscaped spaces. We end up with public spaces full of right angles and paths of dead grass where people actually want to go. We also can see this in the design of retail spaces in many new condo developments... designed as if it was facing a large parking lot rather than a pedestrian street.

 

[yin_yang]

1. the weather
2. because there is a lot of nature a short drive away from toronto
3. because the developer CEOs are stashing as much money away as they can get away with.

i think.

 

[flonicky]

A lot of people are just cheap and/or lack imagination.

The balcony planters on Museum House are a good example. They're a minor detail and they're only there for part of the year but when they're out, the effect is really nice. A cluster of buildings doing that together would be fantastic. People don't do it because they can't imagine how nice it would be.

 

[howl]

Torontonians in general are fiscal conservatives. In the public realm councils will rarely earmark money for "beautification" projects when there are so many other social or infrastructure items that need to be addressed first. "Beautification" is seen as a bad investment by most short-sighted fiscal conservatives. In the private realm development is a competitive business. If a developer can save a few bucks on landscaping, that means they can lower the sale price of their units by a few bucks. Unfortunately, with new buildings people buy units site-unseen which means the developer usually can't recoup the cost of upgraded landscaping anyway.

In order to make landscaping a higher priority someone needs to do a study proving it can be good for business and/or public health, and then put a dollar value on it so decision-makers can be confident they are not wasting money. Also people buying new units need to be willing to pay a bit more for a unit in a nicely landscaped building.

 

[yin_yang]

^yep. i think that's why canada is such a wealthy country. it's logical to transfer wealth into private hands instead of public ones. that gives our country leverage and makes us depend less on government.

find all the tax loopholes you can and exploit them, retire early! i am 28 and already retired.