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

bgd said:
I agree, brilliant news.

I for one am not a huge fan of Jack Diamond.
Click to expand...


Having watched this thread for the last few months it occurs to me that much of the criticism is really just personal and aimed at Jack Diamond, and I think quite unfairly. While some have made useful specific comments about the proposed Chorus building most others have just attacked it as "suburban" or with other generalities. I suspect that most of those comments, maybe not all, are just veiled rummaging of Diamond too.

The Chorus building (both versions, but I marginally prefer June's) looks pretty good and I would suggest that those calling it "suburban" go out and find examples out in suburbia that are anyway near as good as the proposed waterfront design.

I would also observe that part of the challenge for Diamond is the height limits which are imposed by the Waterfront Toronto precinct plan. Any squat building will be less dramatic than, say, a taller tower. Perhaps compared to a 22 storey tower in Winnipeg like KPMB's Manitoba Hydro HQ building - even though that tower is $20 million over budget, 5 months late and got $50 million in government subsidy! On any blush a 22 storey tower will strike an observer more strongly than a 7 story office no matter where it is. However, it would be good to compare the proposed Chorus HQ to other waterfront buildings - but of course there are no others.
 
I agree that the 'personal' nature of some previous posters' attacks on Corus/Jack Diamond are uncalled for, but that STILL DOES NOT MAKE THIS BUILDING OK! People say its a suburban office park because its the best way to describe this mediocre, chicken madras. What we need is the full on vindaloo! Something like OCAD that will grab one's attention and push them to think yet still have fun at the same time.

Toronto is always touting how 'grand' the waterfront will be - I even think I've heard 'world class' thrown around in that vein. But this is simply not world class architecture - it is world class suburban office park architecture.

Boston:
THE_INSTITUTE_OF_2416027_03.jpg

west_view.jpg


San Diego
UTI0599400_1.jpg


(I know its cheap but...) Sidney
Sydney_Opera_House.jpg


Heres a few different approaches to get you started. If you wanna start throwing around loaded terms like 'world class city,' you better have the architecture and infrastructure to back it up. Even the earlier renderings just don't cut it.


Alternatively, we could just start a BRING BACK THE HAIDA! movement and use it to 'modify' whatever building Corus and Victoria Jackman pump out.


800px-HMCS_Haida_Hamilton_Ontario_1.jpg


KABOOM!
 
ANYTHING!

How about everyone post their favorite waterfront building of all time - regardless of functionality - and we'll see if they look at all like any of the proposed Corus renderings.
 
Fair Comment said:
Having watched this thread for the last few months it occurs to me that much of the criticism is really just personal and aimed at Jack Diamond, and I think quite unfairly. While some have made useful specific comments about the proposed Chorus building most others have just attacked it as "suburban" or with other generalities. I suspect that most of those comments, maybe not all, are just veiled rummaging of Diamond too.

The Chorus building (both versions, but I marginally prefer June's) looks pretty good and I would suggest that those calling it "suburban" go out and find examples out in suburbia that are anyway near as good as the proposed waterfront design.

I would also observe that part of the challenge for Diamond is the height limits which are imposed by the Waterfront Toronto precinct plan. Any squat building will be less dramatic than, say, a taller tower. Perhaps compared to a 22 storey tower in Winnipeg like KPMB's Manitoba Hydro HQ building - even though that tower is $20 million over budget, 5 months late and got $50 million in government subsidy! On any blush a 22 storey tower will strike an observer more strongly than a 7 story office no matter where it is. However, it would be good to compare the proposed Chorus HQ to other waterfront buildings - but of course there are no others.
Click to expand...


I don't buy the height argument. Constraints are good for architecture, it forces innovation.
 
^ Although I like Gehry's first office building, I prefer ProjectEnd's suggestion of this:

THE_INSTITUTE_OF_2416027_03.jpg


...works really well. I love how those steps are oriented towards the water. People could sit there watching the harbour.

I'm crossing my fingers that WATERFRONToronto's withdrawal of their support will force this project to go back to the drawing board.
 
Although there's apparently no limit to the venom towards Jack Diamond in some quarters, I think Fair Comment's comments are fair, especially in terms of the visual challenges faced by designers of buildings in sites that prohibit height. The long, low, horizontal stretches of the two wings of the Corus headquarters are a logical solution; they echo the Pier 27 development next to it - also composed of low, horizontal, floating "tabletops" above narrow pier buildings set at 90 degress to them.

Boston's Institute of Contemporary Art ( pictured by ProjectEnd ) has a roof that's as flat as a pancake, and it could just as easily be dismissed as "suburban" by Kuwabara's waterfront design review panel as the Corus building. The question, surely, is why are the suburbs being dismissed as a design-free zone when KPMB have, themselves, designed a number of fine suburban buildings that have perfectly acceptable flat roofs?

The ICA adopts motifs from dockland architecture much as Pier27 does.
 
This is great news. It looks like the review panel is paying off. I can't wait to see the next round of designs.

"Mayor David Miller, a Waterfront Toronto board member, was clearly unimpressed by what he saw. It was he who introduced the motion that upheld the panel's decision.

"If it's not done with design excellence," Miller declared, "it won't work. What Waterfront Toronto did today was to say that you have to achieve design excellence."
Click to expand...

I guess him and Diamond aren't quite as tight as people think.

As for the negative comments towards Diamond, I think they're deserved in this case. While he is a good architect, his work isn't suited to everything - and the design he came up with certainly wasn't suited to this location.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top