Toronto Bloor & Dufferin | 122.35m | 37s | Hazelview | Turner Fleischer

Status
Not open for further replies.
spa docs for the other blocks can be found in this application

Screen Shot 2022-05-18 at 1.55.49 PM.png



app.toronto.ca

Application Details

app.toronto.ca app.toronto.ca
 
Thanks to @DavidCapizzano above.........renders incoming for other blocks. I will do one block per post in case @interchange42 decides to separate any of these into their own threads.

Block F

Architect is Turner Fleischer

1652896898606.png


1652896939622.png
 
Much obliged for separating those @Northern Light. New database files and threads will be split off soon!

42
 
With good materials I think it could turn out alright - even though Turner Fleischer isn't really known for attention to detail or creativity, Fitzrovia for the most part seems to care about these details a bit more than other developers. They are very ambiguous about materials in the plans, with lots of things being labeled as "Metal or Precast or Brick - Dark" or something like that, so I'd imagine we'll see more specifics appear as these things go through rounds of revisions. I think this could be much, much worse though. It's going to be quite the area once this and the Dufferin Mall redevelopment ramp up.
 
The only things the previous iteration had going for it were the articulation and the landscape architecture. Now that crucial last 5% has been VEd to death.

The worst missed opportunity in Toronto architecture in a generation.
 
AlexBozikovic said:
The only things the previous iteration had going for it were the articulation and the landscape architecture. Now that crucial last 5% has been VEd to death.

The worst missed opportunity in Toronto architecture in a generation.
Click to expand...

I'm likewise disappointed; though I'm not sure I'm prepared to bury this quite as deeply as that statement, I'd need to think on that.

When I think of City Place (obviously much earlier), or Humber Bay Shores, or Concord's efforts up by the IKEA in North York, there are so many large-scale disappointments, it's hard to rank them.

****

Will the Globe let you use the bully pulpit to lay waste to the worst developers and architects? I'd buy the physical version of the paper just to read that, the proper way, and save the column for posterity.

I feel they should both be called out; and get a chance to answer; I'd like to see a debate of sorts in the pages of the Globe that goes beyond a single column.
 
To answer your question, @Northern Light?

This *could* have been the most interesting project in the city, while also generating major density. There was potential to interweave public and private program; and for adaptive reuse and heritage retention.

Instead, the public and private programs aren't really mixing. There's minimal and shoddy heritage retention. The urban design (driven by the city) is squash-and-spread, generating a result that's boring, car-oriented and maximally destructive of heritage. And the new architecture on both the school and the apartments is lowest-common-denominator.

The perfect illustration of how Toronto planning generates and incents bad design, on every scale.
 
Last edited:
@ Northern Light

I spit out my coffee when I saw your "Proof Reading is a thing" comment in your Building D post.

But they got it right in your Block B post if you have another look (unless, like me, you're still suffering debilitating eye strain from looking at all those sad renderings).

PEDESTRAIN VIEW
 
3Dementia said:
@ Northern Light

I spit out my coffee when I saw your "Proof Reading is a thing" comment in your Building D post.

But they got it right in your Block B post if you have another look (unless, like me, you're still suffering debilitating eye strain from looking at all those sad renderings).

PEDESTRAIN VIEW
Click to expand...

Why overlook just one mistake, when you can miss two!
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top