IMG_2832.JPG
IMG_2833.JPG
 
My goodness this is horrific. How we allow cheap hot garbage to be built like this on our most prominent streets, time and time again is beyond me. I wish the DRP had more power, because this is just getting ridiculous.

That old plaza which was demolished for this had more of a positive architectural impact on Yonge and Eg, this this non-sense will ever have.
 
Care to expand upon your accusation?

42
From my experience of following projects on this website, the DRP may have lots of useful comments on how the building meets the street, how the podium is configured, how public landscaping is done, etc., but for the most part, they are okay and even encourage standard box style massing (and frown upon excess creativity), and I don't believe they have much jurisdiction to comment on building materials.

I don't know what going to the DRP would have helped for this project. It checks the right planning boxes, the massing is not offensive, and the developer would have still used cheap materials. Relying on the DRP to "save" projects is an erroneous exercise for more than one reason. The only way for projects to be better is for developers to demand better from the projects that they themselves put out.
 
…which is all better stated than your "Remember, the DRP often enjoys outcomes like this." post, which your explanation doesn't really support. The DRP does what is can within its scope. Their advice is still trumped by planning rules like the Tall Buildings Guidelines that dictate maximum building volumes, and by the developer's willingness to spend on exterior finishes. There's no reason to declare the the DRP would somehow be proud of a cheaply detailed building.

42
 
The high-rise part of the building should have been done the way the podium looks with brown tone colours and black trim around windows and door. Making this development look more rich than the way it looks now in white. As you can see in the photos up above.
 

Back
Top