More cognitive dissonance in the area of Junction building facades.

3032 Dundas Street West

One begets another in the Junction it seems, or does it?

Building number 2 certainly has had it’s facade “improved” with a serious amount of cognitive dissonance [1] in the way most people feel is the nature of the Junction street scape and heart. It is common to hear people new to the Junction or long time residents speak of the historical character of the community and it’s difference in living culture as well as lack of pop architecture renewal.

Building 2 would fit well in the chosen style that has developed of the area of  College Street West. This areas restaurant/bar/shopping strip along College Street which is centered on intersection of College and Grace Streets has developed its own unique style from it developed culture.

This  building façade going up at Dundas in the West Toronto Junction  doesn’t exactly blend into its surroundings or fit the developing culture of the Junction, but  its neighbors are  bound for the local architecture history books.  Building  1’s owner did a great job blending the cost/value situation of  the façade renovation and the new old material use, this past summer

Building 3’s owners have consistently maintained their building over the years in a way consistent with the historical nature of the building. they stepped away a few years ago for th ground level area – but not so much as to harm the buildings character.  with the area

At least it’s got large symmetrical windows on the second level. and the arch is a Junction historical feature, just not in the size and placement they have used. Still when this new construction  is finished, it’ll really stick out.


  1. A condition of conflict or anxiety resulting from inconsistency between one’s beliefs and one’s actions


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

  1. John Unction says:

    So… against bulding 2 but in favour of the mess behind No-Frills parking lot?

    Wa wa whaaaAAAAA?

  2. Theirry says:

    I like the combination of bricks and stucco, its like nuts and gum: together at last.

    Seriously though, “Still when this new construction is finished, it’ll really stick out.”… isn’t that, as a business, what you want?

    • A.R. says:

      This just looks awful; it’s the more affluent early 21st century version of the siding work done on facades in the 1970s. It looks so fake. If it’s good architecture, it doesn’t have to fit in. But the stone isn’t going to fool anyone and the tiny windows are terrible.

      Good luck getting your business noticed when the storefront is behind the arch. The first thing one notices is the dreadful apartment.

      It’s also time to take down that huge frame from the roof.

    • A.R. says:

      [^My reply isn’t directed at Theirry. It’s a general reply to this posting]

  3. junctioneer says: (Author)

    Yes they may want it, for their business, does not mean they should run down the historical aspect of the community for their own financial gain.

    I consider all of this in my business ventures too, like deciding not to place my uranium hexafluoride conversion plant the empty lot on Vine Ave, …well the way things are going people may not mind so I keep the idea in play. 🙂

  4. JR says:

    In all fairness, Toronto is known for its mashup of architecture styles. let the tradition continue.

  5. GJ says:

    I can’t imagine how a builder or architect could miss that the entire Edwardian / Victorian area is constructed out of red brick and mortar. That facade looks so cheesy, like a faux Medieval Times dinner theater. Yeah, a business might want to stand out, but not these reasons.

  6. Theirry says:

    As bad as the facade choice might have been, nobody has said anything about the monstrous (radio/cell phone?) tower in the photo… is that not an eyesore far removed for the Victorian era?

    • junctioneer says: (Author)

      it’s the sign holder from the old BADBoy store, hope they reuse it,

      the community should get that thing historically protected, someone should call Neil Ross

    • A.R. says:

      I mentioned that above. If the sign is gone, it’s time to remove the rest of it.

  7. Theirry says:

    for = from (the Victorian era)

  8. Jayde says:

    Though I’m glad they kept the original archway, that new rock facade treatment is shit-tastic.

    Hmm let’s see…here’s an unofficial tally thus far:

    Gingerbread House = fail, business is apparently perma closed
    Acme candy store = fail (bailiff note posted on door)
    no local organic coffee house in the galaxy donuts location yet = fail
    half assed storefront restorations of which this is an example = fail
    Handyman’s store complete demo = fail
    McBride Cycle brick construction demo & empty lot to show for it, stay tuned for a carwash = EPIC fail
    no green grocers except organic Sweet Potato = fail

    Junction Square ice rink = score!!
    annual Junction Arts Festival = score!!
    small bookstores & other smal businesses = generally score
    Smash, cornertstone. post and beam = score
    picture frames custom framung = score
    Big Daddys = score

    pretty even I guess

Comments are now closed for this article.