2006 Summary

[MetroMan1000]

... Additionally, what's up with the window "connectors" all over the glass curtain wall? Aren't those meant to be temporary? The Queen Street glass still has an incomplete feeling about it.

A lot about this building seems unfinished. Who knows? Perhaps once the trees on Queen St and Richmond St. mature, once the café opens, once the planned (but ditched) patio is funded and built, once the Queen st. glass is finished ... once all these kinks are worked out, perhaps the Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts will blend in better with its context.

If it's lost it's bid to wow (never tried really), perhaps it could simply sit there and not be noticed at least. :rolleyes

 

[MetroMan1000]

Don't get me wrong, I think that spaces like these below are gems in the city and I'm very happy to welcome them:

It would be rather hypocritical to simply show my disdain for the current built form of the 4SC's exterior without offering solutions.
So to end my argument (this is a thread about 2006, I don't want to hijack it by discussing this issue alone), let me propose some "small changes" that I feel could improve the integration of this building into the Queen + University context and even contribute to making it better, thus justifying it's presence on such an important city intersection

•*Replace the automotive display on Queen + York with an art gallery or 4SC souvenir store. This is an important corner and that large window is an excellent opportunity to fix the lack of street presence.

•*Open the roof top patio... and don't stop there! The 4SC has an extensive unused roof top surface. A roof top garden on the large North-East corner would contribute a new green space to the city, allow for some activity and help the building become carbon neutral.
This could also help the Richmond side: a glass staircase could climb along the side of the façade at a soft angle up to the roof top garden.
The Disney Concert Hall in L.A. has shown how cultural venues can become a city asset beyond its performance functions. The garden there is a beautiful and serene space.

A photo that shows how a roof top garden would look (the trees shown are from Osgoode Hall behind.. nice illusion):

• Open the café already! The covered window that goes along a large stretch of Queen St is perhaps the single most important missing piece of the puzzle. This alone will account for a large part to improving the Queen St. façade. A Café is good, a sit down restaurant there would be better (I wonder how much space is behind that covered glass).

• The 4SC is already doing something right: lunch time free performances in the city room. Allow access to the city room for longer periods of the day, for casual meetings on the "steps" or for appreciating the city from within the "light box". This could be supported by the existence of the coffee shop below.
The 4SC is beautiful when it's populated with opera goers, but that accounts for only a small fraction of time. Allowing round the clock access will keep this vibe for most of the day.

•*Bonus: This wouldn't help street presence but the auto-curtains on the city room glass curtain wall are currently white. Why not replace the white with a beautiful painting.

The Four Seasons Centre has the potential to remediate itself in 2007

... and it could have been worse:

Phew!

Now back to our regular programing...

 

[adma]

Couldn't resist

 

[MetroMan1000]

^^I don't get it... I think.

Maybe I can make my own connection:

the Four Seasons Cheap Strip Mall and Rob Ford are one and the same: Cheap, bulky and ugly.

 

[adma]

Then there's this...

 

[building babel]

MetroMan1000 makes several bizarre assertions and suggestions:

* That "Queen St. was better off with the parking lot" than with one of Canada's major cultural buildings.

* That punching windows through where the back-lit posters are, along Queen and Richmond, will reveal anything worth seeing.

* Backing large delivery trucks down the parking garage ramp into the basement. Even if this procedure was safe, what would be the point? The delivery dock on York Street is at stage level, which is perfect. And an underground delivery dock would deliver large stage sets to a point that would brobably be beneath the stage - then what?

* The windows were finished last June.

* Encouraging people to traipse all over the roof: Positioning a roof garden at the north east corner of the building makes no sense since there are no public areas beneath it granting access. The same problem applies to the Richmond Street side. With 2,000 patrons at a performance how much rooftop space is really needed?

* The City Room blinds are white to reflect the sun and aid in cooling. Colouring them with paintings would make this process less efficient.

 

[MetroMan1000]

building babel, you're quoting me out of context:

That "Queen St. was better off with the parking lot" than with one of Canada's major cultural buildings.

My post reflected on the fact that a blank, black brick wall serves less of a purpose and is more imposing than the preceding parking lot.
In no way, shape or form did I say that the entire building shouldn't exist.

Re: the Queen st windows. If those are finished, somebody really cheapened out. Those square connectors are generally used to hold windows in place while assembly goes on. They're usually replaced with permanent solutions once assembly is complete.
Somehow I feel that building babel isn't omni-knowledgeable and has been left out of the loop as to the finishing touches that still need to be applied.
The logical next step is to give the Queen St. windows the same treatment that was given to the City Room windows. There were initially temporary connectors, and at the end of assembly, the City Room received horizontal beams that hold everything in place.

The point of a roof top garden isn't to give opera attending patrons more room to wander around. It is a measure to improve public use of the building at all hours of the day. The garden could be accessed from outside via two stair cases (to be added) on York St.

Finally, regarding "punching windows" where the posters are isn't far fetched. There are windows there, they're merely covered with cinderblock. I followed the construction of the 4SC closely and was saddened to see the Queen St. façade become closed up further as the building progressed.
That said, although I can imagine that there is something behind this wall, I cannot assume -as you suggest- that there is something worthy of seeing. Let's be creative then: Instead of a static poster, moving images of opera and ballet, rotating art pieces or other interesting images could be shown in those windows, creating some interest and life to that dead stretch.

That all said, I don't assume that my suggestions are going to work and that they'll be heard and implemented.
I'm simply stating my opinion and offering potential solutions to the widely accepted problem that the 4SC is not friendly with its city context on 3 of the 4 sides. I posted my views so they could be discussed and I'm glad you decided to debate them.

 

[The Burgher of TO]

Those connectors aren't temps, they're permanent, and meant to be architectural. What you're thinking of (they're actually called "dutchmen") are just random bits of scrap metal that get screwed into the mullions wherever you can get one in, and they just stay there as long as it takes for the caulking to set up. Those things are spider clips, and you can see from the pictures that they have very regular and deliberate placement, and that they have a nice little design to them.

I'm not an engineer, but they probably could get rid of them if they really wanted to (the caulking would be more than strong enough to hold the glass in on its own). Honestly tho, looking at them, it was probably the architect's decision to have them there in the first place.

 

[adma]

You might as well take some of those 70s Diamond/Myers designs like Innis College and gripe about their sloppiness because they left all the ductwork exposed, etc. Heck, it was *meant* to be exposed...

 

[building babel]

>Re: 2006 Summary

MetroMan1000 is wrong in thinking that the proposed rooftop patio is intended for the general public and will be open at all hours.

If it is built, it will be for paying patrons on performance days, and controlled access to it will be from within the building. And two stairways up the outside of the building on York Street are as likely to be built as a Stairway to Heaven: there is nowhere to put them for one thing - the loading dock takes up most of that side, and the entrance to the underground parking lot most of what is left over. MetroMan1000's own images, posted earlier, clearly show this.

The windows were finished last June.

If you punch holes in the walls at street level on Richmond and Queen where the back-lit advertising displays are located, probably all you'll see is the back of the box office on Queen and some stairwells or utility rooms, especially on Richmond.

 

[MetroMan1000]

Re: >Re: 2006 Summary

MetroMan1000 is wrong in thinking that the proposed rooftop patio is intended for the general public and will be open at all hours.

If it is built, it will be for paying patrons on performance days, and controlled access to it will be from within the building.

building babel, with all due respect, it is that kind of thinking that represents all that is wrong with the 4SC. Denying access to the city, and calling their most visible area the "City Room" is at the very least hypocritical, some would call it a taunt.

A building that relies on 2,000 people to breath life into it will certainly not thrive in the long run. It may run and be a place to view shows, but remaining inward looking and turning your back to the city will spell dislike and negative reactions to this building. Heck, it is already receiving plenty of it in the media and from regular citizens.

The 4SC will eventually have to open up. Look at Yonge-Dundas Square. Public land, private square. Initially it was micro-controlled. Once management let go and let people populate the square, it developed a life of its own and is becoming increasingly popular.

The 4SC recognizes this already. They have the free City Room performances during lunch time, but there is more work to do.

If regular people are denied access to the "public" areas of the venue consider this: The Ontario Govt' donated the land. I'm a citizen of Ontario and I want my land back.

 

[bizorky]

Re: >Re: 2006 Summary

^The building will not thrive on the basis of the building, it will thrive on the basis of what happens inside. An appropriate venue for Opera is essential for Opera to survive and to thrive. The inside of the buiding looks beautiful and (from what many other s have reported) sound wonderful, too.

As for the brick, it is actually quite reflective, and not black.

The City room provides a great view of the city. I think it is speaking to what you would experience from the inside.

Yes, there are negative reactions to the building. There are also positive reactions as well. These positive reactions are not taunts against those who dislike the building, they are the points of view of people who happen to find favour with it. People who dislike 4SC will have to live with that fact, just as they will have to live with the building as it is.

The 4SC will eventually have to open up. Look at Yonge-Dundas Square. Public land, private square. Initially it was micro-controlled. Once management let go and let people populate the square, it developed a life of its own and is becoming increasingly popular.

^This point does not actually address the building, but its management. The two are quite different obviously. Just curious, but what parallel do you see between a public square and a performance hall?

 

[adma]

Re: >Re: 2006 Summary

But how many venues of this sort are truly, well, "open" in that sense?

Here's a caveat: consider Roy Thomson Hall. Like 4SC, it was subject to criticism from the getgo for its *urbanistic*, never mind its acoustic qualities. You know, for being more narcissistic than truly "public", etc. And that's just as true of its programming; RTH has never been a place to offer itself to "free forum" types of events. It's "elitist" by design; it's not like, say, the St. Lawrence Centre.

I mean, had UT existed a quarter century ago, I'm sure there'd have been a lot of similar not-unreasonably-grounded banter re RTH's "failure", and bold suggestions for "improvement", etc. And I'm not talking about the auditorium; I'm talking about the overall aspect of the building. But if you notice, while the auditorium's been redone, the rest of RTH's still quite close to 1982 mode. And, *god bless*.

Not that 4SC is the equal of Erickson; but still, one musn't jump to overwrought conclusions about its "failure" without allowing time to heal--or not. It may all turn out more benign than we're bargaining for. (In RTH's case, time healed the exterior; it did not heal the interior.)

And the insistence upon "regular people accessibility" can ultimately also be overwrought. Put it this way; given how everything's set up, if you truly want your "land back", you'd have to wait until someone like Peter Kormos becomes premier. (Not that there's anything *wrong* with that;-))

 

[building babel]

Re: >Re: 2006 Summary

adma: RTH has free events too, though not as many as the FSCPA, or as cleverly promoted. Pick op a copy of Wholenote, the classical music listings magazine, and you'll discover that quite a few venues around town hold free concerts and recitals. Also, like the City Room at the FSCPA, the RTH audience is "on display", in the wrap-around lobby, before the show and during intermissions; and in the good weather we sit outside on the terrace at the north end, sipping our gins and tonics and admiring the life on King Street. The interior was "healed" acoustically as well as it could be with the renovations a few years ago - just avoid sitting under the overhangs of the mezzanine or the balcony where the sound can be quite dead and you'll be fine ...

MetroMan1000: There are far more than 2,000 people who regularly "breathe life" into the FSCPA: there were over a hundred musicians in the orchestra for the Ring for instance, and the COC soloists and chorus, not to mention the supporting vocal coaches, costume, set and lighting designers. There are the National Ballet dancers and choreographers, there are the bartenders, coat check staff, volunteers, technical people who work behind the scenes ... the list goes on and on. The standard of excellence that these people create, and the acoustically perfect conditions they perform in, are what attracts the audiences, many of whom go home to Paris or London or New York and tell their friends about Toronto's arts scene. Then there are the thousands of Torontonians who subscribe to the COC and National Ballet. Does any of this sound "inward looking"?

The FSCPA is open to the general community through a series of free concerts, recitals, talks and dance performances in the City Room. That the flat roofs of the building don't double as public space for people to sit and eat their sandwiches or skateboard seems entirely appropriate given the mandate of the building as a performance space dedicated to excellence.