- Thread starter Automation Gallery
- Start date
skycandy
Senior Member
skycandy
Senior Member
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
skycandy
Senior Member
skycandy
Senior Member
achender
Active Member
TheKingEast
Senior Member
Bortholomew is really, really plain. The Wyatt building looks to be following that path.
PMT
Senior Member
skycandy
Senior Member
Taking shape. Glad it's not just another square tower.... also makes for more breathing room in front on RP Blvd. (RP sales centre shots).
Not sure about the colourized street - but I like it if it's realized.
RP overview - approaching the halfway mark in the grand makeover. The white buildings are merely place holders for future buildings.
Not sure about the colourized street - but I like it if it's realized.
RP overview - approaching the halfway mark in the grand makeover. The white buildings are merely place holders for future buildings.
Attachments
am29
Active Member
I'm so glad for the area and am a fan of the redevelopment.. but I will always forever miss the old regent 
skycandy
Senior Member
44 North
Senior Member
Anyone else think we should preserve part of an older RP building? Not for housing, but incorporated/facadectomied into something? It's an important part of our history whether we like it or not. And once they're gone, they're gone for good.
buildup
Senior Member
That would be interesting. Even at total gutting of some buildings while keeping the entire exterior intact.
Skeezix
Senior Member
Heritage staff at the City wanted to save at least one of the Dickinson towers. There were a host of problems/additional costs associated with saving even one of them, but Heritage persisted, and got some support among heritage advocates (I believe John Bentley Mays wrote a column in support at one point). When it went to Toronto East York Community Council, however, dozens of Regent Park residents and non-residents showed up to essentially say "are you nuts?!?" A friend of mine was present at the meeting, and she said the general gist of most of their comments was, notwithstanding the interest shown by a bunch of privileged, white armchair heritage buffs, none of whom actually had lived in Regent Park, these buildings were not great for the residents for a long list of reasons. The residents didn't love them the same way Heritage staff did. Council listened to the residents.
What is mostly left are a number of the red-brick buildings in Regent Park North. About 10 years ago now, I went on a TCHC tour of each of the building types in both Regent Park North and Regent Park South. The red-brick walk-ups in RG North were in terrible shape, compared to the various unit types in RG South, and did not seem like appealing housing. Even the balconies were dank and badly designed. My short tour does not give me the experience of actually living in those units, so I might be off the mark, but my brief exposure did not suggest that there was anything worth saving - even the exteriors (given the building placement and design). As suggested above, I'd far prefer that they save some of the red brick and incorporate it into some sort of commemoration, rather than saving a token building.
It does appear that they will save a small block of Regent Park South townhouses - the ones on the NE corner of Shuter and Regent. Most of that block stayed in private hands during the original Regent Park redevelopments of the 1950s and 1960s (likely due to the fact that (what is now) St George's Macedonian Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church seems to occupy/own most of the block), except for that one corner which got redeveloped along with Regent Park South in the 1960s. There might not be a business case to redevelop that small parcel today, so the old townhouses remain. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe those townhouses are the last remaining Regent Park South 1960s architecture.
What is mostly left are a number of the red-brick buildings in Regent Park North. About 10 years ago now, I went on a TCHC tour of each of the building types in both Regent Park North and Regent Park South. The red-brick walk-ups in RG North were in terrible shape, compared to the various unit types in RG South, and did not seem like appealing housing. Even the balconies were dank and badly designed. My short tour does not give me the experience of actually living in those units, so I might be off the mark, but my brief exposure did not suggest that there was anything worth saving - even the exteriors (given the building placement and design). As suggested above, I'd far prefer that they save some of the red brick and incorporate it into some sort of commemoration, rather than saving a token building.
It does appear that they will save a small block of Regent Park South townhouses - the ones on the NE corner of Shuter and Regent. Most of that block stayed in private hands during the original Regent Park redevelopments of the 1950s and 1960s (likely due to the fact that (what is now) St George's Macedonian Bulgarian Eastern Orthodox Church seems to occupy/own most of the block), except for that one corner which got redeveloped along with Regent Park South in the 1960s. There might not be a business case to redevelop that small parcel today, so the old townhouses remain. Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe those townhouses are the last remaining Regent Park South 1960s architecture.