Toronto Humbertown Redevelopment | ?m | 21s | First Capital | Kirkor Architects

No, But you can't ignore the fact that they are acting the huge NIMBY re. the Ontario Place Casino (in the same way Allied, RioCan and Diamond are Nimby'ing the MTCC one). It's purely economics but it is also purely NIMBYism.
 
Please point me to the section in the Offical Plan, PPS, PTG, or any number of other growth policies which deals with where and how we put casinos in our city/province. There is a difference between one's opinion (wanting or not wanting a casino) and their legally entitled rights (to submit an application and have it reviewed objectively in light of the plans listed above).
 
ProjectEnd: By not nice I meant their attitude after the meetings--ie today--was very telling about their intentions all along. Nobody said they had to buy or redevelop this property. If I was a resident nimby I would vote with my wallet: boycott the new retail in the redeveloped mall.

Do you work for the company? Because I don't work in the real estate biz I tend to see things with a critic's eye.

I had no idea I was a provacateur--it's just how I always am--curious and unbiased (except towards aesthetic excellence :))

Translation: I would prefer this development to proceed but only with "knockout" "gorgeous" architecture.

Now you be provocative and tell me what you really think.
 
Last edited:
urbandreamer said:
"By not nice I meant their attitude after the meetings--ie today--was very telling about their intentions all along."
Click to expand...

>> Well then, why didn't you say that -- i.e., "it looks to me like they knew this last consultation was going to be 100% against them, and had already decided to go straight to the OMB." 'Not nice' implies cleats to the head, this was maybe going through the motions, but there doesn't seem to be any malice.

urbandreamer said:
Nobody said they had to buy or redevelop this property. If I was a resident nimby I would vote with my wallet: boycott the new retail in the redeveloped mall.
Click to expand...

They want a new mall, they just want it exactly the same... just newer. It's like the folks that come to every community meeting and say that what we really need on that site is a new park. Pony up the cash, friends, and buy the place and renovate as you would like. Otherwise, it's First Capital's to renovate as they would like (within reason.)

urbandreamer said:
I had no idea I was a provacateur--it's just how I always am--curious and unbiased (except towards aesthetic excellence :))
Click to expand...

Uh-huh. Someone whose website is 'renderpornstar' thinks they're not a provocateur. OK....

urbandreamer said:
Translation: I would prefer this development to proceed but only with "knockout" "gorgeous" architecture.

Now you be provocative and tell me what you really think.
Click to expand...

Wow. Your rendering is terrible. How about we go with green roofs, more parking, midrise buildings? Oh, yeah... that's the plan.
 
Funny thing is, the antis now seem to be going about this in a constructive-YIMBY-esque way, offering their own counterproposal w/their own architect--what we *really* need is a compare-and-contrast btw/the two schemes...
 
RRR: Thanks for the feedback :) It's a SU model not a rendering. I am still assembling my GTX 680 monster PC so I can get into it properly--layout, textures, details, rendering.

My point is not to criticize the nimbies nor the developer, but rather the choice in massing and architectural aesthetics. I guess comparing similar location to projects in Freiburg, Berlin, Oslo, London etc can be rather enlightening ... For example, why is the north end of the project a large suburban-looking 1-2s single use building? Why can't the density be spread around more logically--ie build housing on top of this CRU use? Other than large shopping centres and perhaps Yorkville, show me an example of successful 2nd storey retail in a suburb! Why can't the streets be rerouted to provide greenspace in the only logical spot--the southeast corner?

Picture this scenario: Forest Hill Village flattened and redeveloped into midrise mid-market condominiums. I suspect the developers who live in that 'hood would protest ... :p (My response as a fantasy developer: It's within walking distance of the subway, multiple transit lines etc! Why you stupid nimby!)
 
Last edited:
urbandreamer said:
Wow. Big improvement. (Except I still loathe the 2s retail concept) Clearly Wallman is in charge now.

(Makes me wonder: Am I psychic or something with my similiar pattern going on?)
Click to expand...

Wallman is in charge of the cladding - i.e. the window dressing. Kirkor is still the architect of record and LV are still the retail architects.
 
It's all good!

42
 
I don't know. The retail is overwrought and makes me think it could turn into another Crossways Mall c.2040s.

I'd like to see more variety in the buildings rather than the same cladding pattern over the entire multi-phased project. (Which is where my concept is superior ;) Let's say phase 1 completes in 2018, yet the final phase won't be built until 2030? Yeah you gotta think about that too!)

Green roofs are nice to look at...but a future maintenance nightmare, esp in Toronto's crappy hot summers & brutal winters.
 
Last edited:
urbandreamer said:
I don't know. The retail is overwrought and makes me think it could turn into another Crossways Mall c.2040s.

I'd like to see more variety in the buildings rather than the same cladding pattern over the entire multi-phased project. (Which is where my concept is superior ;) Let's say phase 1 completes in 2018, yet the final phase won't be built until 2030? Yeah you gotta think about that too!)

Green roofs are nice to look at...but a future maintenance nightmare, esp in Toronto's crappy hot summers & brutal winters.
Click to expand...

There is nothing binding anyone to a particular design or cladding choice. In fact, if the final phase wasn't built until 2030 it would almost certainly look different from earlier ones.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top