Lavishy goes hot pink!

jra-lavishy-goes-hot-pink

Nothing says historic preservation like a fresh coat of hot pink paint.

I find this paint job particularly disappointing when compared to the restoration one building east and in a week we saw the exterior siding removed from 3034 Dundas.  Originally built in 1909 this building held its original character for a hundred years until somebody decided to paint it pink.

It seams some landlords are doing the right thing in preserving the Junction and some just don’t have a clue.

Post by Martin.

23 Comments

Got something to say? Feel free, I want to hear from you! Leave a Comment

  1. burnham says:

    isnt that a back-lit sign also?
    that adds to the potential “dumbing down” of a streetscape too

  2. A.R. says:

    This is a mistake. Beyond the aesthetics, maintaining the look will prove to expensive over time, which will discourage maintenance. I’m worried that it’ll look as ugly as that massive Victorian at Keele and Dundas after awhile. This isn’t really all that great a building in the first place, but restoration of brickwork would have probably made it more attractive than this.

    I think we need a campaign to discourage owners from painting their facades as it’s quite common in the Junction.

  3. David says:

    Well, anybody is allowed to do anything they want to the property they own, but I wouldn’t be surprised if this actually discourages other retailers from moving in to the remaining storefront along this block of the Dundas strip. As a rule I’m not a big fan of painting brick at all, but at least painting it something close to a natural brick colour is pleasant to look at and may actually help preserve the brick by potecting it from the elements. But painting a building a pastel colour is, well, kinda embarassing.

    I imagine it’ll also make it much more difficult to sell the building or rent out again when the time comes for the current owners/renters to move on.

  4. West Bend/Junction Resident says:

    I actually kind of like the pink treatment, especially in the Lavishy aesthetic context. But yeah paint jobs on brick tend to deteriorate quite quickly if not done properly.

  5. Theirry says:

    Usual lot of whiners…

    waaaa change

    • junctioneer says: (Author)

      Theirry they are not whiners, but people making & expressing reasonable opinions.

    • Fred says:

      I’m with you Theirry, someone call the wambulance. You people are criticizing someone’s choice, presumable the owner’s choice. No one asked you if you were OK with it before hey painted it. I find the design of your website hideous, you probably should have asked me my opinion before you designed it.

      • A.R. says:

        That’s the thing about architecture, since it’s in public, of course people are going to criticize it at will. That’s the nature of the subject. Public space belongs to us all, and whether the owner likes it or not, the exterior of their property becomes a public matter.

        And some classic Theirry: “accept everything, don’t discuss”. Come on, there’s good change and bad change. And we’ve seen a lot of good change in the Junction over the years.

  6. JV says:

    Does anybody know what the cost to clean and seal the brick on the face of these buildings? I bet it’s a lot more then a few cans of paint.

    • junctioneer says: (Author)

      Considerably more to clean and restore than, but much better for the building.

    • CK! says:

      A cheap alternative to costly and meticulous cleanup of individual bricks is to just power wash the bricks, which is what I did a few years ago and its amazing how much of the buildup comes off with a good powerwash, then you can re-seal it with a clear coat of protective agent. This process would cost about the same as painting the br

  7. Irina says:

    Hideous…. Yes, paint is cheaper.. if you MUST paint the bricks, why not paint them “brick” colour? Maybe this horrible shade of pink was on sale.

  8. Denise says:

    I get the point that Lavishy is trying to align their outside exterior with their product, but it just doesn’t work. I also understand that they are trying to attract attention, but hot pink??

    Never paint brick if you don’t have to!!! We live in a painted brick house and it is a pain to maintain and peels often. The previous owner slapped on a coat of paint, instead of investing in much costlier (but more appropriate) brick restoration. But on the other hand, some argue that painted brick is actual proper for venacular Victorians.

  9. Martin says:

    Given the paint job is amateur at best (I counted 6 safety violations plus an illegal sidewalk closure) I think the owners intent was to get the biggest impact for the lowest dollar.

    Cheap doesn’t have to be in bad taste though and I’m sure with a bit of creativity a better way to get attention from the pedestrian traffic could be found.

    • Junction Resident says:

      If you are truly concerned about the safety of the workers, you should contact the city. If something happens to one of them you may regret not saying anything.

      • Martin says:

        Hello Junction Resident, if they worked for me I certainly would make them do it safely but they don’t. I did tell them they can’t shutdown the sidewalk and force people to pass on the street but my comments were not received well.

        Thanks for your insight on the design, all comment are welcome and you make a good point that paint can always come off. The Benjamin Moore store on Pacific and Dundas is a great example.

        • A.R. says:

          The work on James Hall (where the Benjamin Moore store is) was brilliant. Paint hid so many details.It’s most likely that at one point those details weren’t even seen because pollution and weathering makes facades look more monochromatic, so painting seemed more sensible. But the restoration was great, even though the original roof details weren’t restored. Perhaps sometime in the future that can also be done.

  10. Junction Resident says:

    (1) That’s NOT hot pink.
    (2) While I’m not a fan of people painting over natural brick, it can be restored to more-or-less the original condition when someone has the money to do the work. Let’s face it, this isn’t a beautiful pristine building with lovely brickwork and it never was.
    (3) I think it will look clean and bright. I have no problem with the colour and it works for that store’s purpose. Not what I would have chosen, but it’s not my building.

  11. dave says:

    It’s not my building….exactly. No one has a claim on this building except the owner and they can do what they like. I think some people here have far too much time if they are worrying about something as mundane as this. Some parts of Austria have coloured houses and they look really pretty.

    • junctioneer says: (Author)

      The city and the province have “claim” on any building in addition to the owner – for example no building owner on Dundas St West is allowed to modify the the height of their commercial building over 15 meters, and there are hundreds more regulations a building owner must follow. In the City of Toronto it is illegal for a homeowner to knock down his or her house without getting pre-approval for what will be built on the land after the home has been removed.

  12. Theirry says:

    (following the junctioneers post above) …. which all has nothing to do with the actual facade we’re talking about, and the owner’s right in painting it whatever colour they wish… even if it offends some local’s delicate sensabilities.

  13. TO.vic says:

    Such a dumb colour. Obviously no clue or too lazy to restore good brick.

Comments are now closed for this article.