Toronto Social at Church + Dundas | 164.89m | 52s | Pemberton | RAW Design

[DSC]

Taken 2 March.

View attachment 544985

That overhang thing is bizarre. Are they adding glass to it? If not why is it there apart from being handy for pigeons!.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

That overhang thing is bizarre. Are they adding glass to it? If not why is it there apart from being handy for pigeons!.

...looks like they're already taking notice of that. >.<

 

[AlbertC]

Sheesh, that ground level experience is bleak.

 

[Northern Light]

That overhang thing is bizarre. Are they adding glass to it? If not why is it there apart from being handy for pigeons!.

The pigeon-roosting protrusions are uniquely awful; but this again speaks to why I don't like the structural overhangs buildings generally (or in-set at-grade if you prefer).

1) The sidewalk underneath isn't really public, though there's likely an easement covering public use, its a way for a developer to cheat on the sidewalk width requirements.

2) The overhang means additional shade/less sun at-grade and limits any ability to grow trees, both upwardly and typically below grade (lack of soil volume/root space)

3) Now that you've created a overhang it will be very dark at night, its now incumbent on the condo board or separate owner of the retail podium to ensure that that lights are in operating order and fixtures cleaned to ensure adequate illumination.

4) Pigeons do not need more roosting space.

5) Such space overwhelmingly deadens sidewalk; if retail is present, it reduces the visibility of signage.

6) Because it's being used to cheat the sidewalk width minimums, such space is often precluded from having patios.

7) It looks dumb, buildings should not get fatter as they go up.


****

The one thing I can say for those protrusions @3Dementia will tell you the pigeons are doing the only thing one can do when discussing that building's architecture. As the white streaks so clearly demonstrate.

 

[DSC]

The pigeon-roosting protrusions are uniquely awful; but this again speaks to why I don't like the structural overhangs buildings generally (or in-set at-grade if you prefer).

1) The sidewalk underneath isn't really public, though there's likely an easement covering public use, its a way for a developer to cheat on the sidewalk width requirements.

2) The overhang means additional shade/less sun at-grade and limits any ability to grow trees, both upwardly and typically below grade (lack of soil volume/root space)

3) Now that you've created a overhang it will very dark at night, its now incumbent on the condo board or separate owner of the retail podium to ensure that that lights are in operating order and fixtures cleaned to ensure adequate illumination.

4) Pigeons do not need more roosting space.

5) Such space overwhelmingly deadens sidewalk; if retail is present, it reduces the visibility of signage.

6) Because its being used to cheat the sidewalk width minimums, such space is often precluded from having patios.

7) It looks dumb, buildings should not get fatter as they go up.


****

The one thing I can say for those protrusions @3Dementia will tell you the pigeons are doing the only thing one can do when discussing that building's architecture. As the white streaks so clearly demonstrate.

I think the original idea for overhangs and colonnades was that pedestrians would walk under them in inclement weather. Of course, this not what happens as they get filled or blocked with displays, patios and the occasional fence! (The one at this ghastly building is even more bizarre than usual as it has the 'pigeon roosting beams' strung over it so will probably be totally avoided (by humans). Sheesh!

 

[maestro]

I wonder if they are rethinking the awning with the pigeons leaving their mark before the glass has been installed. Removal of the supports may be too much of an ask.

 

[allengeorge]

I think the original idea for overhangs and colonnades was that pedestrians would walk under them in inclement weather.

My observation is that they’re a failed idea. They deaden the sidewalk - and people avoid them in both bad weather and good. Also, retail under overhangs doesn’t have street presence, which limits their foot traffic.

 

[3Dementia]

The pigeon-roosting protrusions are uniquely awful; but this again speaks to why I don't like the structural overhangs buildings generally (or in-set at-grade if you prefer).

The one thing I can say for those protrusions @3Dementia will tell you the pigeons are doing the only thing one can do when discussing that building's architecture. As the white streaks so clearly demonstrate.

"The one on the left is a Pemberton building".

Link

 

[DSC]

I wonder if they are rethinking the awning with the pigeons leaving their mark before the glass has been installed. Removal of the supports may be too much of an ask.

It is not clear to me that they intend to install glass on the beams. If they do so they will make a perfect pigeon nesting area and one that will doubtless also attract garbage and litter. The whole 'design' is bizarre. Photo thanks to @rdaner

 

[maestro]

Yeah, an awning doesn't any sense but, what else could they be? Oh, maybe supports for retail signage? Wood slats could add some warmth until the pigeon poop leaks through.

 

[bcmc]

First retail tenant! Let’s hope the burgers are good and can distract us from the building itself. And hopefully the canopy/signage situation works out well for them.

 

[Rimawi]

First retail tenant! Let’s hope the burgers are good and can distract us from the building itself. And hopefully the canopy/signage situation works out well for them.
View attachment 546287

Great burgers! They have a few other spots around already. Best of which it’s fully plant based which is great for our environmental footprint

 

[amh]

What's not good for our environmental footprint is that this entire building should be fully razed to the ground and replaced with something less insulting to whatever we have left of a civic identity. Dundas Square was already where architecture goes to die, but this might be the very final straw. I mean, surely it can't get *worse*, can it?

 

[DSC]

What's not good for our environmental footprint is that this entire building should be fully razed to the ground and replaced with something less insulting to whatever we have left of a civic identity. Dundas Square was already where architecture goes to die, but this might be the very final straw. I mean, surely it can't get *worse*, can it?

Pemberton still seem to be in business so I am not so sure .......

 

[maestro]

I think we're building residential neighbourhoods at too high of a density so, it can only get worst even if The Cheapening is banned and window wall is outlawed.