Toronto U of T: Jackman Law Building Expansion | ?m | 3s | U of T | Hariri Pontarini

Sod put in today on Philosopher's Walk side. I'm still holding out hope for a whack of lilac bushes along the fence where Hoskin meets Queen's Park to replace the ones that were pulled out.
 
Actually every side of it seems to look like the back end. It's bafflingly bad all around and my gut reaction - especially to the Queen's Park facade - is to wish for an immediate teardown and redo. Very disappointing for a Hariri Pontarini project indeed.
 
When I saw the curve in the facade along Queen's Park, I thought it would meet the street well and offer something engaging to passersby on the city's grand boulevard. Instead, it's anonymous like a nondescript suburban building whose back wall faces a highway. There are no real focal points to the architecture or interesting patterns along Queen's Park. The concrete walkways are also unimpressive.
 
I, too, wish the building was better animated at-grade and provided a better forum for interaction with pedestrians, but I disagree that there are no interesting elements of the design itself - I think the whole form is interesting. I think it carries the curve nicely, utilizes high-quality materials in an effective manner, and provides an interesting yet restrained break with the prevailing form of the surrounding architecture.

The first five metres off the ground are disappointing, but that above speaks to me much better. I'll say, too, that my opinion of the building changed not insignificantly after seeing the product in-person; I had similar sentiments as have been expressed in the last couple posts until I saw it in-person.

I'm also interested by the fact that it represents such a stark departure from some of the other work HP has done in the area, thinking specifically of One Bloor E, 7 St. Thomas, and the McKinsey building.
 
Having seen the latest photos of this building, I also wish it met the street better, but I stand by my earlier praise of the design and materials. It's subtle, for sure, and reminds me of campus modernism of the 60s and 70s, which is a style that nobody else working in these days. Maybe I like it because it seems anti-trendy.
 
I am really disappointed with how this turned out, given the prominent location. I looked up some of the other finalists for this project, and I really liked the saucier and perotte concept. Especially given the fact that the planetarium and faculty of music will be undergoing redevelopment and a unified design like the one proposed would have been exceptional.

https://www.law.utoronto.ca/documents/general/building_SaucierPerrotte.pdf
 
I wish there were more US embassies that look this good.

It's a bit forbidding, but that's the nature of lawy-courty architecture. This isn't the student activity centre or the daycare. That said, some softening when the landscaping grows and greens up will not be a bad thing.
 
I think this is an excellent design for what it is - a law school. It ostensibly projects order via the well defined form and spaced fins, but when you get a little closer you see the finer grained variation in the shades of stone and varying thickness of vertical bands of stone (spandrel?) between the fins which obscure the order somewhat. As soon as I saw it I thought the fins represented "rules" and the alternating/fluctuating tones and bands as representing "interpretation". It's perfect.
 
CapitalSeven said:
I wish there were more US embassies that look this good.

It's a bit forbidding, but that's the nature of lawy-courty architecture. This isn't the student activity centre or the daycare. That said, some softening when the landscaping grows and greens up will not be a bad thing.
Click to expand...

The new US embassies under the GSA building program all looked pretty good (if not unavoidably fortress-like/lite, for obvious security reasons).

AoD
 
Progress on the landscaping.
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 879
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 878
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 873
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 885
Walked through again today.
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
image.jpeg
 

Attachments

  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 763
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 758
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 761
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.1 MB · Views: 757
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 762
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.1 MB · Views: 754
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.3 MB · Views: 759
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.2 MB · Views: 746
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.4 MB · Views: 744
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    935.9 KB · Views: 749
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1.1 MB · Views: 767
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    1 MB · Views: 761
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    614.8 KB · Views: 793
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    553.8 KB · Views: 765
  • image.jpeg
    image.jpeg
    996.1 KB · Views: 741
It's interesting that a new Law building was inherently designed to have a dimmed area where the 'weight' of the 'law' casts a shadow, where questionable activities may take place. And in full view of a very active, public, street.
 
I was wondering what was under the overhang on the south edge. That area between the building and street would have been great for a outdoor terrace to enjoy a coffee and watch all the people walk by on the sidewalk. Like so many academic buildings, all the activities are hidden inside, and they don't flow out to meet the sidewalk and street.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top