Status
Not open for further replies.
20220716_130235.jpg
 
A very last minute Member Motion is now before Council.......concerning this development.......that prompts......🤨


Apparently the proponent here would like Council permission to alter certain aspects of this development via the COA.
 
I’m seriously considering writing the developers, I don’t know if it will make a difference but it just feels like this is not reflective of the ambitious vision previously of the site. The website previously was about integrity and it seems like the architectural language is bland and doesn’t reflect their ‘progressive nature’.

Who should I write?
 
abovegrade said:
I’m seriously considering writing the developers, I don’t know if it will make a difference but it just feels like this is not reflective of the ambitious vision previously of the site. The website previously was about integrity and it seems like the architectural language is bland and doesn’t reflect their ‘progressive nature’.

Who should I write?
Click to expand...
They're likely more interested in the money they'll save cutting back on the expectations, as opposed to public opinion of what they've decided to build. They probably won't tell you that in the reply. They may even tell you their own lofty narrative of why they're doing this way for the token PR. But it's highly unlikely to change their minds now in the exercise. Sorry...
 
abovegrade said:
I’m seriously considering writing the developers, I don’t know if it will make a difference but it just feels like this is not reflective of the ambitious vision previously of the site. The website previously was about integrity and it seems like the architectural language is bland and doesn’t reflect their ‘progressive nature’.

Who should I write?
Click to expand...

Not that it's likely to shift things; but I appreciate your initiative!...........

So

Option 1) Use the feedback form on the project webpage.

The Project - Bloor & Dufferin

Learn about the plans and meet the developers behind the future revitalization of Toronto's Bloor & Dufferin community.
bloordufferin.com bloordufferin.com

For the remaining options, I'll send you a message........
 
i think this was just another case of showing renders that were too polished / detailed during the master planning stage. HPA does this a lot (see bloor Dundas, the initial well renderings)

Those designs were never going to get built - it was just to illustrate the site plan and massing of the proposed structures.
 
DavidCapizzano said:
i think this was just another case of showing renders that were too polished / detailed during the master planning stage. HPA does this a lot (see bloor Dundas, the initial well renderings)

Those designs were never going to get built - it was just to illustrate the site plan and massing of the proposed structures.
Click to expand...

Right, but in this case, HPA is also out as the architectural firm; sub'ed with a firm with a significantly lesser track record.

I think we can't be too harsh on anything that smells of bait and switch. An approval is granted and a condo purchased based on a render in large part. Delivering that render is (or rather should be) a part of the deal.
 
Northern Light said:
Not that it's likely to shift things; but I appreciate your initiative!...........

So

Option 1) Use the feedback form on the project webpage.

The Project - Bloor & Dufferin

Learn about the plans and meet the developers behind the future revitalization of Toronto's Bloor & Dufferin community.
bloordufferin.com bloordufferin.com

For the remaining options, I'll send you a message........
Click to expand...
I still think my probability of my less than stellar advice will still hold fast in the end. Unless they rehire HPA for a complete do over...this is a done deal. And /sigh.
 
Northern Light said:
Right, but in this case, HPA is also out as the architectural firm; sub'ed with a firm with a significantly lesser track record.

I think we can't be too harsh on anything that smells of bait and switch. An approval is granted and a condo purchased based on a render in large part. Delivering that render is (or rather should be) a part of the deal.
Click to expand...

Definitely agree that renders should match what is being built, but I think that only can really apply after a project has gone through site plan control where specific design and architectural details are hammered out. The HPA designs were just placeholders used during rezoning where they aren’t yet refining the actual architectural treatment of the buildings, but simply the site plan and massing of the development, hence my comment about the renders perhaps being too aspirational. Maybe simpler more suggestive designs would have been better to show to the public as to not set expectations too high. It’s also important to note that none of the earlier plans had any specific details in the arch docs about materials or the stuff you normally see during site plan control

I also think the change in ownership had something to do with the design pivot.
 
DavidCapizzano said:
i think this was just another case of showing renders that were too polished / detailed during the master planning stage. HPA does this a lot (see bloor Dundas, the initial well renderings)

Those designs were never going to get built - it was just to illustrate the site plan and massing of the proposed structures.
Click to expand...

I think UTers would do well to be a little more cynical/critical and less boosterism about projects sometimes as well - I can count so many times people (including myself admittedly) were fooled by renderings by proponents without the slightest intention to implement as is.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Status
Not open for further replies.

Back
Top