[Admiral Beez]

Or the rich folks. Like the Ontario Lieutenant Governor's home (until 1960).

From link.

Most people tend to try to "imitate" the rich, using "polyester" instead of "silk", in their building materials.

Jes#s, that's ugly. But do we consider the Lieutenant Governor rich because he's living in good public housing? He doesn't own it.

When I lived in Fredericton, NB I would often walk the Lieutenant Governor's residential grounds and thought it looks nice. Way better that the pile in Ontario.

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

Jes#s, that's ugly. But do we consider the Lieutenant Governor rich because he's living in good public housing? He doesn't own it.

When I lived in Fredericton, NB I would often walk the Lieutenant Governor's residential grounds and thought it looks nice. Way better that the pile in Ontario.

Correct. They torn it down in 1961 and replaced with a park (Chorley Park). The Lieutenant Governor now resides in a suite of several state rooms and offices inside the northwest wing of the Legislative Building at Queen’s Park in Toronto. Consider it a multi-use building.

 

[SunriseChampion]

I’m 22 years and going in the same house, but few seem to stay in a house for more than ten years anymore; so shoddy design, materials and construction don't really matter as long as you can sell the house onto someone else before it fails.

So, get this: some custom homes have issues from day one. These things cost sometimes millions of dollars to build, mind.
There are two facets to this issue:

--People are fools who don't know the value of quality and only see price. They pay for the cheapest contract and the end result can only be the obvious.

--Some shady builders rely on quick turnover of projects to keep the money flowing. They can thus afford to patch over problems in finished builds, as they arise.
That's if they don't run and hide, of course.

I also sense that many of these rectilinear and infill homes are property flips, where the builder-owner have zero interest in the longevity of the house as long as it superficially presents well and stays sound until legal liability is exhausted.

This may be the case in some areas or when built by certain builders (a lot of Chinese foreign money projects in North York, for example) but the style is the latest fad amongst a lot of local architects.

Let's forget for a minute that flat roofs are absolutely idiotic in our climate and are meant for dry climates....but, yeah, the internet has given architects too many ideas that don't fit here, let's just say.

 

[SunriseChampion]

Which exactly proves Sunrise Champions' point that here our emphasis is on disposability in the name of selfish gain - "I got mine, so eff everyone else."

See my next post re: the toads who think like that usually get bit real quick.

 

[lenaitch]

Jes#s, that's ugly. But do we consider the Lieutenant Governor rich because he's living in good public housing? He doesn't own it.

When I lived in Fredericton, NB I would often walk the Lieutenant Governor's residential grounds and thought it looks nice. Way better that the pile in Ontario.

Jeez that's nice (nice photo too). Looks like it has a bit of a view.

 

[Admiral Beez]

Jeez that's nice (nice photo too). Looks like it has a bit of a view.

My House was nearby, both nice on the hill, above the flood plain.

 

[christiesplits]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1315829506985398273

 

[Darwinkgo]

Yeah. If your zoning won't allow for the lower end of the missing middle, people will still build something the size of a small walkup and just make it a SFH.

 

[salsa]

Yeah. If your zoning won't allow for the lower end of the missing middle, people will still build something the size of a small walkup and just make it a SFH.

Imagine if this was allowed in Toronto.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1315637073773301762

 

[Monarch Butterfly]

https://twitter.com/x/status/1315829506985398273

They could put in a basement apartment with the infill.

 

[MurrMann]

Whenever I see a bungelow or older two story home torn down the replacement is almost almost a boxy, flat topped structure with big pane glass windows and usually the maximum house allowed on the lot.

Whenever I see these houses I wonder, beyond location why did the owner want to move here? They clearly had no interest in the architectural history or feel of the neighborhood. I imagine these home owners say to themselves, it's my property, I'll build whatever I like, the neighbours can go f#ck themselves if they don't like it.

 

[Darwinkgo]

Neighbourhoods are not museums to the feel of a neighbourhood at a certain point in time. Houses of a certain time were largely dictated by materials available and optimization to utilize those materials economically. Why should we be bound to those optimizations forever?

If the city does not rezone to allow for higher density, eventually almost all single family and semi lots will be redeveloped to maximize the potential value the parcel may hold with a single family home. If they are rezoned for higher density, the same process will go forward just with multiple units.

To whose benefit would freezing a neighbourhood in time be? Frankly it is only in the benefit of people who already own there and don't want to pay higher relatively property taxes. Eventually they'll even claim they are worthy of tax breaks or even grants!

 

[MurrMann]

I absolutely agree with what you mean (I think). The City cannot be a museum of its history but it can preserve pockets that are worthy examples of the progression of immigration, building styles, materials and lifestyle. The perimeter of every city in Canada is gobbling up prime agri-land at an astonishing rate. We must densify housing, and industry. and warehousing, and transportation.

I’m not sure what you mean by the second sentence. Higher and higher density will happen because of or in spite of government participation. Sing-Detach will be farm dwellings. However it is incumbent on renovation and infill designers to consider the nature of the community. You are designing for the wellbeing of both your client and the neighbourhood. You may combine 2 singles into a 4-Plex or as the neighbourhood densifies into 6, 10, 24 storey developments. In the meantime consider the community and the period in time.

One more thing: Just because Bob X slept at a house is not a valid historic preservation.

 

[dusk]

They boxy style exists because its an attempt to maximize the size of what can be built due to archaic zoning. Personally, I'm a big fan of these homes that destroy neighbourhood "character" (code for "I got mine"). Fingers crossed that we got more of this.

 

[SunriseChampion]

They boxy style exists because its an attempt to maximize the size of what can be built due to archaic zoning. Personally, I'm a big fan of these homes that destroy neighbourhood "character" (code for "I got mine"). Fingers crossed that we got more of this.

Why? They're of poor design for our climate, generally ugly, poorly built in a lot of cases, and do nothing most of the time for our need of densification in these neighbourhoods.

I'm with you on not caring about the "character" of Yellowbelt waste-of-space, but these particular replacements are a sham.