RonThom
Active Member
BDP Quadrangle is notoriously bad at site planning, circulation layout, urban design, and open space relationships. They have executed some attractive buildings but to hire them for a large masterplan is not wise.
- Thread starter innsertnamehere
- Start date
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Another article on these. One by one, media outlets are actually finding out. Good for them. Maybe the Toronto Star will be next?
innsertnamehere
Superstar
Not sure I'd say it's "notoriously bad" (I mean what else have they done that's actually terrible for master planning?) but this one is obviously extremely rushed and back of napkin and there is definitely something to be said for BDPQ not stepping back and trying to do something a bit more comprehensively..
Undead
Senior Member
In fact, some suburban offices are being redeveloped into warehouses and data centres because of all the e-commerce, delivery and WFH.
Suburban office teardowns make way for industrial warehouses
E-commerce demands greater than traditional office needs
www.theglobeandmail.com
sikander
New Member
Enhanced Minister's Zoning Order (EMZO) issued
www.thestar.com
Ontario issues orders to fast-track developments in Richmond Hill, Markham amid rising criticism
On the eve of Good Friday, Premier Doug Ford's Progressive Conservatives issued two special zoning orders to rubber-stamp massive residential developments proposed for two Transit-Oriented Communities (TOCs) along the Yonge
www.thestar.com
Northern Light
Superstar
Story on the EMZO's from CBC:
From the above, one of the opponents of this offers the following:
From the above, one of the opponents of this offers the following:
Lenser
Senior Member
That is some crazy density right there. It leaves me deeply ambivalent. I'm all for aggressive densification in urban centers and in edge cities, but this one gives me pause. Feels dystopian and I fear (perhaps unreasonably, I'll admit) that this thick urban knot, if built as planned, will become a ghetto.
Bjays92
Senior Member
Having lived in Hong Kong and frequented Mong Kok many times, this is absolutely mind boggling to me. The idea that anywhere in Ontario could be more dense than Hong Kong much less Richmond hill of all places, should most certainly give everyone pause for a minute.
afransen
Senior Member
I honestly think the province owes us much more of an explanation for their rationale on this. We should not be approving such extremely dense communities without some well articulated planning rationale beyond BDP Quadrangle gave the OPC some nice campaign contributions.
Edit to add: I have to wonder if this somehow was done by political staffers who don't actually understand what it is they approved.
Edit to add: I have to wonder if this somehow was done by political staffers who don't actually understand what it is they approved.
Last edited:
Undead
Senior Member
One of the reasons is to avoid intensifying the yellowbelt. At the community consultation, Michael Fedchyshyn from IO was explicit about this.
I think the concern about retail, grocery, services etc is a bit overblown. We've seen many dense clusters appear in the city over the last 15 years; services and retail naturally follow the increased demand.
It's doubtful that retailers and grocers will avoid an immensely dense area. Market dynamics and demand will naturally drive them to locate here. But yes, I agree that these provisions should be more explicitly stated in the planning framework and policies.
I think the concern about retail, grocery, services etc is a bit overblown. We've seen many dense clusters appear in the city over the last 15 years; services and retail naturally follow the increased demand.
It's doubtful that retailers and grocers will avoid an immensely dense area. Market dynamics and demand will naturally drive them to locate here. But yes, I agree that these provisions should be more explicitly stated in the planning framework and policies.
Northern Light
Superstar
The proposed density is excessive; the excessive heights drive up costs per unit as well.
Beyond that, I think there is need for clear human scaling at street level, adequate parks and public realm, proper provision for adequate employment; and there is also the matter of adequate unit sizes.
What's proposed here is something absurd, I hope that we see a change in government, and that if we do the MzO is revoked.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
BDPQ is an architect acting on behalf of a client - other than the fees paid by the client for the design work they don’t be benefit from this. It’s those paying BDPQ’s bills you want to look at as who is driving this and who will benefit.
Amare
Senior Member
And here's yet another example of the province being in bed with developers. There's absolutely no reason for excessive density like what we're seeing being proposed, but yet somehow we're randomly seeing this amount of density being proposed here?
I find it laughable that the province does things to make it seem like they are helping with housing affordability (and I bet this will be the main reason they give, that all the units will help the supply issue and thus drive prices down), but in reality this is nothing more than them waiving a shiny object for the public to see, but in reality the province could care less. That's exactly why we see the province floating around foreign home buyer taxes, and increasing supply, while at the same time scrapping things that really help such as rent control. And the sad thing is, people fall for it, then start crying "my rent/price of houses is so high".
I find it laughable that the province does things to make it seem like they are helping with housing affordability (and I bet this will be the main reason they give, that all the units will help the supply issue and thus drive prices down), but in reality this is nothing more than them waiving a shiny object for the public to see, but in reality the province could care less. That's exactly why we see the province floating around foreign home buyer taxes, and increasing supply, while at the same time scrapping things that really help such as rent control. And the sad thing is, people fall for it, then start crying "my rent/price of houses is so high".
denfromoakvillemilton
Senior Member
Either this or sprawl.
Lenser
Senior Member
This is a polarizing and extreme response to "sprawl." It fails to acknowledge the mediating influence of infill, laneway housing, mid-rise and so-called "missing middle" urban designs. There's an entire pantheon of sensible responses to the housing crisis; we are ill-served if all we are presented is the "wisdom" of several 60+ stories of skyscraper condos huddled together on the same tight patch of land.