Canadian City Proposals II

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

I've never understood the massive criticism of the Crystal - I've always liked it.

I agree that the entrance needs work however and this seems to go a long way on that front.

I'm on your side here. I like it, and people need to remember it's not covering up tge heritage if the structure anymore then the addition it replaced.

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

I'm on your side here. I like it, and people need to remember it's not covering up tge heritage if the structure anymore then the addition it replaced.

I don't think the critique of the proposed entrance is about "heritage". It's just that the new entrance isn't a good design for the existing structure. As I said in the other thread, having a very standard horizontal orientation with lines parallel to the ground fundamentally disagrees with the rest of the building's gestalt. And having different materials and such a big canopy gives the impression that the entrance as its own separate entity is the focal point. It encourages people approaching the building to focus on the entrance and disregard the rest of the building as if it was an embarrassment one wishes to hide.

But a successful addition would enhance the whole and play to the strengths of the existing building rather than reject and abandon them. This is different from the crystal addition which is basically the entire museum when viewed from Bloor street while you can barely see the crystal when viewed from the Queens Park side. So the two parts don't fight or detract from each other. But the proposed entrance isn't a new structure that stands alone as its own architecture. It's just an alteration to the existing crystal. And to the extent that you can apprehend the historic building and the crystal addition simultaneously, there's already significant contrast between the old and new, while this additional contrast just leads to incoherence. Two contrasting styles is one thing while three is another entirely. The former can be artful, fresh, and dramatic if done well, while the latter is inevitably just a mess.

I agree w/ dleung that while the current entrance could use improvement, the new entrance should reflect the wider style which means integrating with the crystal theme. I would rather a more vertically oriented version but his sketch is certainly better than what's proposed. The proposed entrance is very nice on its own but simply doesn't work in context. Like someone wearing a very standard, corporate business suit to an avante-garde, artistic cultural event. It may be a nice suit, but very out of place.

[TorontoDrew]

Originally Posted by MonkeyRonin

-the finishes are low quality and/or badly implemented (like the mismatched titanium cladding on the exterior);
- it's a poorly executed building

I'm not seeing the low quality materials or poor execution of the exterior you are talking about.

I do agree however the interior of the crystal is a little awkward, but it works well for the dinosaur exhibits. It wouldn't work well for most other antiquities though.

[TorontoDrew]

I think it's interesting how some people think the crystal was added onto the original old structure when it just replaced another addition from the 70's. Back then Bloor was just the side yard for the R.O.M. The Crystal tripled the space of the older addition. In doing so it became the main entrance but it did miss the mark when creating the new main entry to the museum. I think the upgrades look fine and the new entrance and fountain will soften the overall feel of the Bloor Street side of the R.O.M.

source: urbantoronto.ca

[Nouvellecosse]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

I'm not seeing the low quality materials or poor execution of the exterior you are talking about.

I do agree however the interior of the crystal is a little awkward, but it works well for the dinosaur exhibits. It wouldn't work well for most other antiquities though.

Yeah I don't think the execution is terrible but you can definitely see variations in the colour of the siding panels. Other than that I don't mind the materials, but it definitely suffers from a bit of the "expectation vs reality" meme because of what was presented in the renderings. It's common for renderings to paint an overly rosy picture, particularly when projects are value-engineered. But it's a bit different in this case because the design places such a high priority on aesthetics. When you hire a starchitect to create a landmark statement piece then the aesthetics take priority over other areas including cost and functionality. You do not cut corners on the aesthetics so some of the criticism is warranted. But I'm generally happy with it.

[J.OT13]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

I think it's interesting how some people think the crystal was added onto the original old structure when it just replaced another addition from the 70's. Back then Bloor was just the side yard for the R.O.M. The Crystal tripled the space of the older addition. In doing so it became the main entrance but it did miss the mark when creating the new main entry to the museum. I think the upgrades look fine and the new entrance and fountain will soften the overall feel of the Bloor Street side of the R.O.M.

I wasn't aware of the 70s addition. Honestly, I like it a whole lot better than the crystal.

Here's a rendering of the Crystal as proposed:


https://divisare.com/projects/16722-...um-the-crystal

vs. was was built:


https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Royal_Ontario_Museum

Certainly, the changes proposed today to formalize the main entrance will improve things.

[Nouvellecosse]

^ Yeah I wasn't aware of it either and I do like it. But I do think Bloor deserves to have something that interacts with it more rather than be relegated to the sidelines.

And the old addition doesn't really affect my view of the proposed new entrance. I don't get the distinction between whether it was "added" to the old building or just replaced the previous addition. It's like saying, "He didn't actually put on that hat. The new hat just replaced a hat that he put on earlier". In either case it still has to look good, be appropriate for the occasion, work with the rest of the outfit / architecture, etc.

[WhipperSnapper]

The Queen Elizabeth Terrace Building was actually built in the 1980s and she was present at the official opening.

[MonkeyRonin]

Originally Posted by TorontoDrew

I'm not seeing the low quality materials or poor execution of the exterior you are talking about.

I do agree however the interior of the crystal is a little awkward, but it works well for the dinosaur exhibits. It wouldn't work well for most other antiquities though.

Materials:
-Mismatched colouration on the exterior cladding.
-The titanium reads as more of a dull grey than the shimmering silver that was intended by the renderings.
-Fairly standard interior finishes - painted drywall, epoxy floors, aluminum doors, etc. (fine, but not remarkable)

Execution:
-Seams in the exterior cladding are overly large, which takes away from the monolithic, crystalline intent and allows you to see glimpses of the framing beneath the cladding.
-The seams also don't align on the edges.
-The aforementioned entrance, which is a pretty standard aluminum shop front door without much apparent thought put into how cohesive it is with the rest of the architecture.


https://www.azuremagazine.com/articl...0-years-later/


Overall, I still think it was an ambitious building and the results are kinda cool (even if not to my personal taste). The execution just didn't live up to the intent of the architecture. And despite its size (and cost), there's a heck of a lot of wasted space. The museum would have been able to display a larger collection with a design that put its purpose at the forefront.

[MonkeyRonin]

800 Commercial Drive - social housing tower at Commercial & Venables:




This is also proposed next door at 1739 Venables Street:


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1739...ffo-properties


A small office/industrial development in an industrial area not too far from the proposals above - 851-865 Terminal Avenue:


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/851-...trial-building


Some big suburban developments - revised plan for Surrey's Centre Block






https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/surr...mpus-expansion


900-unit, multi-tower development in Delta:






https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/8037...-redevelopment


And a flurry of uninspired rental towers have also been proposed or approved in Vancouver recently:

1055 Harwood Street


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1055...wer-gwl-realty


1365 West 12th Avenue


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1365...rental-housing


665-1685 West 11th Avenue


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1665...rental-housing


1190 West 10th Avenue


https://dailyhive.com/vancouver/1190...rental-housing

[ScreamingViking]

Renders of parts of the proposed massive redevelopment of the former Stelco steel lands in Hamilton were posted by blogTO.
https://www.blogto.com/real-estate-t...milton-stelco/

If they can pull this off (and it will be interesting to see the reaction by city planners reviewing what's been submitted) it will be a MASSIVE change. Most of Stelco's operations were built on landfill, creating a nearly 2 km square complex of factories. There will have to be a lot of remediation for parts of it, and it will take time to build out, but it will be unprecedented to have public access to stretches of the shoreline along this part of the harbour.

This post in the Hamilton subforum shows more of the concept as it was initially proposed: https://skyscraperpage.com/forum/sho...&postcount=385

[Nouvellecosse]

^ That would be very cool actually. Sort of like a pos-industrial, ecopunk utopia.

[WhipperSnapper]

Yeah, that's really cool. It's almost too big and too immersive.

[ScreamingViking]

It's very ambitious.

The corporation that bought the shell of Stelco from U.S. Steel has done more than I expected, but their long-game had to have been about the land and not the steel-making. While I have doubts about the container facility ever being viable (it would require moving containers from ships at deep-water ports to/from others that are compatible with the St. Lawrence Seaway; CN and CP will despise that kind of competition and move to kill it) much of the land can be adapted for other commercial/industrial uses. If it ends up just being a warehouse farm with some pedestrian pathways along the shore then so much potential will be wasted.

There are probably fears this will become a hotbed for tall condos, but the previous uses of the land will limit their financial viability.

I also wonder what mysteries will be discovered as infill is dug up. I bet a lot of "problems" were solved there.

IMO this all represents an enormous opportunity for the city.

EDIT: Yes, "Stelco" has nothing to do with this, other than being a link in the chain. It was bought by a company called Bedrock Industries after U.S. Steel owned it; Bedrock renamed it Stelco again (from U.S. Steel Canada). Bedrock has kept some of the steel-related facilities but sold off much of the land to another company called Slate. Many of the old steel plant buildings have been or are in the process of being demolished.

[Innsertnamehere]

To be clear here Stelco has no involvement in this. They sold the land a few years ago and a toronto developer is proposing this now.

[LikesBikes]

I love that Hamilton proposal. If successful it could be something like the Forks in Winnipeg.

[J.OT13]

Other than the last two, those Vancouver proposals are stellar. First one I thought was a heritage building.

Really liking that Hamilton proposal.

[WhipperSnapper]

I probably wouldn't say stellar. They are quality.

The Surrey master planned block expands on the city hall (?) block. The Delta one is interesting although the pedestrian corridor should be wider. I'm assuming this area is marked for a high rise urban node and this block may be the centrepiece of that node. It's still Delta.

[hipster duck]

That Hamilton proposal is amazing; it would be *the* reason to visit Hamilton, not just *a* reason to visit Hamilton.

But where is the money coming from? The cost of building that vision looks astronomical, beginning with the things we can't see in the renderings like remediating a toxic site. And what are the revenue generators? I don't see a lot of leasable space or even event space - or at least not anything to the scale that would recoup the costs. If only 1/10 of that gets built, I'd consider it a win.

[niwell]

Echoing what was said above, the Hamilton proposal looks amazing and something that would be a legitimate destination. Also very ambitious and expensive. Not sure how realistic getting something like this done would be, especially at the proposed scale. Still shows you what potential there is though.