Looking at the plans, the double height lobby looked like it was once supposed to open up the rear courtyard and connect it with Queen Street. This iteration looks to have kept the space, but oddly closed it off with that giant brick wall.

Agree to disagree. I think this just poor architecture that does not pay attention to its context. It is social housing that’s drab, and looks like a prison. And who are we kidding, we already know this will not have a nice brick. My real beef with the project is each iteration of it somehow...

Competent? This has to be the worst iteration of this building. Brown and gold? It looks like an awful 1980’s development. This is Parkdale, full of red brick buildings, why would you not use red brick? The zoning submission with the red brick base and glazed upper levels looked far better...

Even the modern art addition has character- the stairs, the large window with the wooden shades. It’s more then your making it out. I’d really just like to see some views of the main spaces of the addition which don’t seem to have been published. We’ve got a view of the elevator lobby and that...

Hopefully not. And that’s not true at all of the Gehry addition. Most of the spaces have character - from the large gallery along Dundas, to the interior spaces with those lovely skylights, to the character of the trim boards. There’s no way they’re adding an addition that’s fully one third...

“increasing the total space to display art by 30 per cent” It just occurred to me how large of an expansion this is, and just how little has been revealed of what the interior will actually look like. We have like two interior renders? And one is of the elevator waiting area. I wonder why...

Who’s the architect? Also, they have new renders up on their website, looks nice. Reminds me of 401 Richmond with a tower on top.

I went looking for the public meeting for this thinking it was today, and it’s already came and passed. 🤦 Did anyone go?

The site plan above shows they could consolidate quite a large area of land with one extra property. I wonder why they are leaving so much development potential on the table and locking the site in with a development at the south. It would definitely make more sense to develop the North end...

The first image has cafe tables outside, so I assumed retail. I didn’t look at the plans. I think it might be too early to say if it’s decontextualized. A zoning submission is usually just defining building envelopes and intent of preservation, not architecture. There are likely ways to improve...

The chimney is visible in the first and second render. It’s obscured by the glazing. It’s definitely a nice to have, maybe they are keeping it for rental value. A cafe or restaurant with a giant chimney inside is a great marketing opportunity and would make for a pretty interesting space.

I’m not disappointed they didn’t rip it apart, I am disappointed because it was quite obvious the review committee did not have a true variety of opinions. All of it seemed of the same positive tone, very little was thought through, and it was quite obvious no one on the panel had frequently...

I would assume it’s this: https://universitypark.evergreen.ca/ Also, the DRP meeting is up on YouTube, so anyone can watch it. Pretty disappointing to be honest, there was very little real criticism. I got the sense the members barely looked at the project, and were taken in by a few buzz words.

Shadows on Stanley Park is the most likely culprit.

I disagree with this. When there is no one at public meetings and no one from local BIAs on board with a specific design, that’s not NIMBYism. That’s a failure of the design team to produce something of value. There is a lot to fix in Queen’s Park, but the problem in this plan - is most of...