Toronto AGO: Dani Reiss Modern and Contemporary Gallery | 48.35m | 6s | AGO | Diamond Schmitt

You have to wonder if actually creating an off-site annex to the AGO (umm hmm....the Canada Malting Silos) might be a better thing than continually adding to the current footprint, especially given the collection of contemporary art will invariably grow.

AoD
 
A while back David Thomson was planning another museum for his collection on the "above ground art supply store" site next door as well. I wonder what happened to that.
 
If I remember correctly, neighbourhood activists were up in arms over the Gehry expansion because it exceeded the AGO envelope that was seen as sacrosanct after the Barton Myers expansion. Then the activists were brought on board with Gehry somehow with the promise that it would be the final expansion. So, how will this one work?

Also, how will it gel with OCAD's planned expansion?
 
Last edited:
clarkburglar said:
A while back David Thomson was planning another museum for his collection on the "above ground art supply store" site next door as well. I wonder what happened to that.
Click to expand...
There’s signs in the park immediately north of Form Condos indicating that the park is temporary. I thought that was flagged for gallery space.
 
From @AlexBozikovic 's piece:

1643429235900.png


And:

1643429280066.png


The area with visible surface parking is what's being discussed:

1643429651731.png


Based on the projected height (six storeys) and the stated ft2, the footprint is either slightly smaller, or, more likely excludes the grade-level which would retain a loading function.

Edit to add:

This is the streetview of the site from McCaul St. The height would likely be comparable to the Gehry structure in blue; w/o knowing ceiling heights one can't be certain, so it would be smidge shorter.

Note that this is an L shape, but I can't capture the full extent in one shot. But there is second shot below that shows the N-S axis portion.

1643430267095.png


1643430439317.png


I also went to the old Grange Park thread to see if I could get a good shot for everyone of where this building would be sited, if viewed from the park. Found it:

img_5096-jpg.107980

Photo Credit: GeneralGrievance

It would visually appear almost mid-way between Gehry and Alsop
 
Last edited:
DKsan said:
Disappointing, if not expected, that it's just at AGO site. This could have been that "Catalytic Destination" that Waterfront Toronto has been planning for the Lower Don Lands.
Click to expand...

I'm inclined to agree.

Though, I''m not dead set on moving all of AGO, its pre-existing collection is already vastly larger than what it can display; and should one of its chief patron's (Mr. Thomson) see fit provide
another chunk of his colllection, the space deficit on the existing site will only grow.

That, to me, leaves a problem, one I'm not sure is resolved by continual piecemeal additions grafted together, in an effort to squeeze every last inch out of their existing site.

There is a logic to AGO where it is, for historical reasons; and because OCAD is right there as well.

But I think it's long since time to consider a more wholistic solution for future needs.

The options:

1) Relocate AGO entirely; if locating outside the immediate area, a discussion could be had to move OCAD with them; or to separate them (spatially), and perhaps even giving the existing site over to OCAD.
2) Rebuild in-situ; but do so cohesively, with one big thought, figuring out the 100-year plan for institution's needs.
3) Split the institution, potentially as one institution/two buildings/sites, or dividing it up. Say, shift all the contemporary stuff to a restored Hearn (once we figure out transit access to that site) and keep the Masters/Group of 7 downtown?

We're AGO relocated, the existing site could:

1) Be devoted to the OCAD campus
2) Preserve only the heritage buildings on site, remove the rest, and extend Grange Park to Dundas as a signature downtown park.

All that said, I hope we do see a new signature building on the Waterfront as contemplated; an interesting adaptive use for the Hearn, and I wish the AGO well here in creating a high-quality addition which adds accretively
to the Gallery both functionally and aesthetically.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: rbt
Northern Light said:
The options:

1) Relocate AGO entirely; if locating outside the immediate area, a discussion could be had to move OCAD with them; or to separate them (spatially), and perhaps even giving the existing site over to OCAD.
2) Rebuild in-situ; but do so cohesively, with one big thought, figuring out the 100-year plan for institution's needs.
3) Split the institution, potentially as one institution/two buildings/sites, or dividing it up. Say, shift all the contemporary stuff to a restored Hearn (once we figure out transit access to that site) and keep the Masters/Group of 7 downtown?
Click to expand...

There is something special about a so-big-you-can-get-lost museum/gallery, and I would fear that a stand alone contemporary art institution could dilute/cannibalize the potential MOCA has to grow into something more substantial. Split sites for the ROM (a natural history museum and a museum of anthropology/human history) would make more sense to me if we really needed something on the waterfront given the constraints on its current site and the more easily defined split mandates.

For a long-term vision for the AGO, I would propose:
  • Acquiring the Sharp Pavilion and the low-rise commercial buildings to its East and replacing them with a larger, well-designed annex building connected to the main building via tunnel or pedestrian bridge across McCaul (perhaps with OCAD uses integrated to replace the existing space they have on that site)
  • Eventually acquiring the 52 Division site, knocking down the eyesore that currently stands there and building an additional structure connected to the other buildings by tunnel somehow threaded around/through the Village by the Grange and under St. Patrick
 
You love to see it. Let the NIMBYs moan about a 6 storey art gallery addition in the middle of the city. Never have NIMBY tears been so sweet. I just don't care what they have to say about it.

Completely disagree with anyone saying it should be spread around the city. The AGO is a destination. It is a decent size but could be larger and have more core gallery space. This will take something great and make it greater.

Plus OCAD, U of T and Ryerson and so many other institutions are right there, so this is great for art students and young artists to be able to access as well.

Build it.
 
Really excited to read about this proposed expansion. The AGO has a really strong collection and we only ever see a small sliver of it (not unique to us, of course... true of every major museum in the world), and I find I often only go for the exhibitions because I've already seen so much of the permanent collection over and over again. Would love to have more space to show the permanent collection, particularly around contemporary art.
 
As much as I'd love to see an off-site auxiliary gallery (maybe in the Gehry towers on King? Or somewhere on Villiers Island? Kensington? Around the Science Centre?) I could see the existing site allowing for one more addition if maybe they did a land swap with OCAD. OCAD can have the loading/parking area wedged between it and the AGO, and the AGO gets to expand that little nub of frontage on McCaul southward into the land currently occupied by the main OCAD building. Include provisions for a shared loading entrance.

It's been a long time, but my memory of the back-of-house experience at the AGO was of an awkward, painful, confusing labyrinth of corridors that could only arise in a building that had been cobbled together over decades of incremental renovations. I generally like the Gehry revitalization, but it's to the point where any further tinkering would really warrant a total implosion of the structure.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top