Toronto Corus Quay | ?m | 8s | Waterfront Toronto | Diamond Schmitt

It's strange to see a building going so weirdly overboard in an attempt to make itself seem fun, palatable or engaging. I guess since nothing about the building itself screamed (or even murmured) "entertainment" - (quite the opposite) - Corus felt they had to overcompensate, with a vengeance.
It photographs much more interestingly than it feels in person. Everywhere you look inside that atrium, there's a gimmick, an installation, an add-on or an obstacle. The architecture is not allowed to speak clearly and cleanly, which was just about the poor functionalist hulk's only going virtue.
A friend of mine remarked that the atrium, "which should be a place of clarity, with clear views, looks rather like the old interior of the Science Center - stuffed full of stuff." Personally, I think it looks like it was tricked out by Harry Stinson.

Usually I'm all for art installations, but there's no dignity put into their setting here. They need more room to breathe. Here they get lost in the cacaphony, and feel unhappily like just another perky thing to keep you distracted, competing with the juvenalia. Too bad, because the pieces are quite enjoyable.
 
Last edited:
Imagine that, Hume doesn't disagree! I stopped in at this building yesterday (took a look at the big hole next door for George Brown as well). I like the building. It isn't meant to be an "entertainment" venue; it's an office. It has a couple of whimsical touches to improve the value of the employee experience (the slide -- brilliant -- and the restaurant on the ground level, which I can't believe will be much of a destination for many other than the employees in the building, until we get quite a bit more development nearby).

The green wall in the atrium is the tallest in the city (I think). I liked the fish suspended from the ceiling, referencing the waterfront location. The location itself is the best feature, IMO, facing water on one side and the innovative Sugar Beach on a second side. The view of Redpath reminds us of the industrial history of this neighbourhood.

The architecture is not knock-your-socks-off spectacular, but is that really what was looked for here? It's an above-average, attractive workplace in a good setting. It adds to the city.

Edit: And another thing. Re-read Hume's article. It's a good example of what I dislike so often about him. He seems to be somehow unhappy at the fact that the radio studios are located on the ground level, behind big windows prov iding some openness to the public. Isn't that what he claims to want? There's a limit how "public" a private business office can be, after all. What does he want, clerical people working in the atrium?

He also makes a completely inexplicable comment, negative in tone, acknowledging that 1,100 people have moved to a location which certainly needs a kickstart, but then snidely mentions something abour downtown's loss. Does he approve of the move or not? Even in things which most of us would call positive, why does he toss in his little comment in a negative tone? It's one thing to provide intelligent criticism, it's another to constantly look for little chances to whine and snipe, even to the point of contradicting your own larger point. Hume seems to do this pretty regularly, to little point. I still read him, but I take his comments less and less seriously. He's not as smart as he thinks he is.
 
Last edited:
Observer Walt said:
Imagine that, Hume doesn't disagree! I stopped in at this building yesterday (took a look at the big hole next door for George Brown as well). I like the building. It isn't meant to be an "entertainment" venue; it's an office. It has a couple of whimsical touches to improve the value of the employee experience (the slide -- brilliant -- and the restaurant on the ground level, which I can't believe will be much of a destination for many other than the employees in the building, until we get quite a bit more development nearby).

The green wall in the atrium is the tallest in the city (I think). I liked the fish suspended from the ceiling, referencing the waterfront location. The location itself is the best feature, IMO, facing water on one side and the innovative Sugar Beach on a second side. The view of Redpath reminds us of the industrial history of this neighbourhood.

The architecture is not knock-your-socks-off spectacular, but is that really what was looked for here? It's an above-average, attractive workplace in a good setting. It adds to the city.

Edit: And another thing. Re-read Hume's article. It's a good example of what I dislike so often about him. He seems to be somehow unhappy at the fact that the radio studios are located on the ground level, behind big windows prov iding some openness to the public. Isn't that what he claims to want? There's a limit how "public" a private business office can be, after all. What does he want, clerical people working in the atrium?

He also makes a completely inexplicable comment, negative in tone, acknowledging that 1,100 people have moved to a location which certainly needs a kickstart, but then snidely mentions something abour downtown's loss. Does he approve of the move or not? Even in things which most of us would call positive, why does he toss in his little comment in a negative tone? It's one thing to provide intelligent criticism, it's another to constantly look for little chances to whine and snipe, even to the point of contradicting your own larger point. Hume seems to do this pretty regularly, to little point. I still read him, but I take his comments less and less seriously. He's not as smart as he thinks he is.
Click to expand...

I visited the site for the first time last weekend and, given all the negative bitching on this project, was relieved that I actually liked it. This is just one piece of an evolving context, and it will fit right in. As the first commercial development action on the new waterfront, I wonder also why Hume is so petulant.
 
Maybe it's a Torstar vs. Corus type thing? The closing lines are interesting: "The interior, with its forced jollity, underlines the immaturity of a scheme that in its most basic assumptions is essentially suburban. This is a building that cares about what happens on the inside, but not so much about the role it plays in the larger urban context. For a media company, such oversight doesn't bode well," considering they were written in the Toronto Star building. If any media company is going to be criticized for the role its building plays in the larger urban context The Star should be the first against the wall
 
Observer Walt said:
The architecture is not knock-your-socks-off spectacular, but is that really what was looked for here? It's an above-average, attractive workplace in a good setting.
Click to expand...

Well yes, actually. Some might argue, and with some legitimacy, that a little oomph here was exactly what was called for. As for 'above average' architecture... really? and as for the setting, well we can hardly thank the designers for this. In fact the design shows they were somewhat oblivious to it.

Frank Godfrey said:
I visited the site for the first time last weekend and, given all the negative bitching on this project, was relieved that I actually liked it. This is just one piece of an evolving context, and it will fit right in. As the first commercial development action on the new waterfront, I wonder also why Hume is so petulant.
Click to expand...

Why is his critique petulant? He found some positives but at the end of the day finds this building to be a silly and trite contextual failure. The whole project smacks of the kind of painfully forced corporate spirit that views accountants sliding down a tube as edgy creativity. Yuck.
 
This Hume guy also said that Q107 and AM640 are the city's most tired radio stations.. which is a load of crap
...seeing as Q107 is known as one of Canada's best radio stations..

So personally I don't care what his opinion is...
 
Actually, keep in mind that it also houses AM640, i.e. Rob Ford's media mouthpiece; and keeping in mind the politics of Derringer and his like...
 
Q107 is utter crap... who the hell still listens to dated classic rock anyway? Probably the same people that go to Leafs games I suppose. talk about being stuck in a rut. get with the times...
 
I like the fact that they have the 9 radio broadcast booths along the outside of the building and the public can see in. (better at night, due to the slightly darkened glass) The Q107 booth is the largest one, it has the big slide-open window. It could be interesting to go down and watch when they are interviewing noted performers. It just adds a bit of animation to the building.

I wish the waterside restaurant was a bit more open, with a nice outdoor patio. That was a missed opportunity, with so few nice, waterfront restaurants in this city. It should have had those huge sliding windows like on the lobby or at least an outdoor patio area that's accessible from the restaurant. That's kind of a no brainer.
 
whatever said:
Maybe it's a Torstar vs. Corus type thing? The closing lines are interesting: "The interior, with its forced jollity, underlines the immaturity of a scheme that in its most basic assumptions is essentially suburban. This is a building that cares about what happens on the inside, but not so much about the role it plays in the larger urban context. For a media company, such oversight doesn't bode well," considering they were written in the Toronto Star building. If any media company is going to be criticized for the role its building plays in the larger urban context The Star should be the first against the wall
Click to expand...

Yes, ha ha, that was the first thought that went through my mind as well, although in fairness, Hume isn't responsible for the unfortunate building he works in. I wonder which way his office faces?
 
Redroom Studios said:
Q107 is utter crap... who the hell still listens to dated classic rock anyway? Probably the same people that go to Leafs games I suppose. talk about being stuck in a rut. get with the times...
Click to expand...

people who have good taste and actually listen to music as opposed to what is called "music" these days...
 
Redroom Studios said:
Q107 is utter crap... who the hell still listens to dated classic rock anyway? Probably the same people that go to Leafs games I suppose. talk about being stuck in a rut. get with the times...
Click to expand...

You're so right. Katy Perry, Eminem and Nickelback blow the Beatles, Pink Floyd and Jimi Hendrix right outta the water.
 
Last edited:
It's probably not so much the "dated classic rock", as the presentation thereof, i.e. the situation would be no different if a Katy Perry-obsessed Top 40 were housed in the same premises. In practice, there's a greater gulf btw/what Q is doing and what CBC is doing than btw/what Q is doing and what Kiss or Virgin are doing...
 
Even when I listened to more rock music (e.g. 102.1 The Edge) I never listened to Q107. Nowadays I listen to Kiss 92.5, Virgin 99.9, Z103.5, 104.5 CHUM FM and when I feel intellectual I listen to 99.1 CBC Radio 1. Admittedly, my intellectual days are few and far between. Mostly go there when nothing good is on the other stations.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top