Saw a new video posted on the Milborne instagram, though I can't seem to permalink it.

7 Dale | Toronto

Twenty-six, private, ultra-luxury boutique, ravine residences, nestled on a quiet, tree-lined street, bring history and modernity together in perfect harmony.
www.7dale.com www.7dale.com
 
ptbotrmpfn said:
I love this it’s reminiscent of brutalist style. Which personally I love. But I get it’s not everyone’s taste. It’s a distinct look. Again that’s why I like it. Reminds me of the old Trent university building here in Peterborough. It has a “cozy” feel.
Click to expand...
It's certainly my taste...for what that is worth.
 
Crane is up:

562BD955-3B96-4658-9398-A549754D3A31.jpeg
4ACB6F28-049E-4852-812B-10F1381F594A.jpeg
577AA885-2EA7-4CFA-9512-90232848F81C.jpeg
 
ptbotrmpfn said:
I love this it’s reminiscent of brutalist style. Which personally I love. But I get it’s not everyone’s taste. It’s a distinct look. Again that’s why I like it. Reminds me of the old Trent university building here in Peterborough. It has a “cozy” feel.
Click to expand...

Agreed- though this isn't really brutalism, I must say that any strongly geometric style often thrives when softer elements are integrated into the design (i.e. placement of foliage, use of contrasting warm materials like wood, contrast/contexturalization against neighboring buildings).

IMO, many of my favorite instances of brutalism integrate these considerations (Trent, Scarborough, Simon Fraser for the location/landscaping, the Barbican for its internal landscape design, the Salk for the wood and views), while many notable failures overwhelm or fail to tie the architectural object to the surrounding- which is where the well-deserved accusations of bleakness and adriftness emerge from.
 
Last edited:
Msleylar said:
Another decision out from the Tribunal, yikes.

2020 CanLII 73600 (ON LPAT) | Dale Inc. & Dale II Inc. v Toronto (City) | CanLII

Access all information related to judgment Dale Inc. & Dale II Inc. v Toronto (City), 2020 CanLII 73600 (ON LPAT) on CanLII.
www.canlii.org
Click to expand...

Though, thankfully, this one is good news (if at a very small scale) for the proponent. Basically, the proponent asked the Board to force the RAs to pay $150K in costs and the Board said "yeah, we hear you, the RAs were being a bit ridiculous here, but $150K seems a bit much to assign to an RA (though we don't really have a good mechanism for assessing what an appropriate amount might be), so why don't we make the RA pay you $22K."

Still all such a silly and unfortunate waste of time on the part of the RAs, but I think this is a pretty measured decision.
 
Interesting. The main reason the tribunal awarded costs was because the RAs put forward an "expert" witness who apparently didn`t know what he was talking about -- he didn`t understand that a neighbourhoods designation does not preclude apartments up to four storeys and thus wasted everybody's time.
 
UT should really do a story on this. Would be a lot more interesting than another development proposal story. Probably too edgy for them though.
 
I did some googling and their expert, Carl Bray, who's testimony is described as "incredible", does consulting work all around ON. More than a bit concerning when a consultant (I am one) can't even get the facts right when offer testimony at a tribunal.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top