U of T: Dept. of Astronomy and Astrophysics (50 St George St, ?s, Morphosis/Teeple)

[TJ O'Pootertoot]

Of course, BlogTO just found out about it independently :

https://www.blogto.com/city/2018/10/downtown-toronto-could-get-stunning-new-planetarium/

AoD

I would like to see a Top 10 list of their "independent" sources...
Besides, you didn't say it was "stunning" so they might have done their own research.

 

[jje1000]

maybe we should put ours next to the ROM?

Of course, which is why the new location is a bit puzzling. They should either reuse the old planetarium building, or build a new one that can be directly accessed through the ROM.

I feel like the new location is going to end up like those university department mini-museums that you occasionally have around- nice to have, but not something that can draw a lot of people.

 

[TOareaFan]

Of course, which is why the new location is a bit puzzling. They should either reuse the old planetarium building, or build a new one that can be directly accessed through the ROM.

I feel like the new location is going to end up like those university department mini-museums that you occasionally have around- nice to have, but not something that can draw a lot of people.

I was, of course joking, but my experience with other events at venues on the UofT campus is that for niche type stuff the word gets out and people find Convocation Hall or Macmillan Theatre just fine....with only 200 seats to fill, I think this new planetarium will be catering to that niche/hardcore crowd of stargazers (nothing derogatory intended there) and will do just fine.

 

[jje1000]

Interesting note from Alex Bozikovic- could we get Toronto's first Zaha?

Quite the list of architectural heavy hitters are taking a look at that planetarium building project. @ZHA_News @MaltzanArch @rexarchitecture @3XN_GXN @snohetta @mecanoo_ plus every important Canadian firm. This had better be good.

https://twitter.com/x/status/1098635965344686080

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Interesting note from Alex Bozikovic- could we get Toronto's first Zaha?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1098635965344686080

This moved faster than I thought. I'd be happy with Ennead - Ex-Polshek, which did Rose Center at AMNH.

AoD

 

[Xiaohaha]

Of course, which is why the new location is a bit puzzling. They should either reuse the old planetarium building, or build a new one that can be directly accessed through the ROM.

I feel like the new location is going to end up like those university department mini-museums that you occasionally have around- nice to have, but not something that can draw a lot of people.

The main purpose for the build is to expand office spaces for the astronomy department and related units. Currently, astronomy people are spread between floors 12-14 of MacLennan Labs, the 50 St George building with spill-over going to Earth Sciences across the street. The new building will put all the astronomy, Dunlap Institute and CITA people under one roof. The planetarium is just there as a bonus - possibly to attract donor funding.

The old planetarium location on Queen's Park was floated in the past, but it wouldn't have worked. It would be too far from the physics building. Many of the physics faculty collaborate with astronomy faculty and supervise their students and vice versa, and moving astronomy so far away would weaken these collaboration opportunities.

 

[condovo]

^^^Nothing wrong with a "hook" to attract donors if executed well.

 

[MetroMan]

Interesting note from Alex Bozikovic- could we get Toronto's first Zaha?

https://twitter.com/x/status/1098635965344686080

Is the firm still designing in the style of their departed namesake? I mean, is it still a Zaha if it wasn’t designed by Zaha Hadid herself?

 

[interchange42]

Is the firm still designing in the style of their departed namesake? I mean, is it still a Zaha if it wasn’t designed by Zaha Hadid herself?

1) Yes, and 2) No, but every new project will be judged as to whether or not it is a worthy adjunct to her legacy. The studio might want to change names sometime in the near future though to indicate its origins but distance itself slightly. (I wonder how many buildings she had a hand in that are still being completed. Once they are all done, would it not make sense for a name change then?)

42

 

[p5connex]

Why the need to change the name or distance itself slightly, due to the passing away of the studio's namesake? The origins and design traditions, character and guiding principles, instilled in her employees etc. (often former students) will remain, albeit evolve as with any design firm.

 

[interchange42]

Because eventually they will be working in her tradition, but not on her designs? I think there should be acknowledgment of that. Maybe just drop one of the two names (Zaha Architects or Hadid Architects?) or find an associated name. For example, Frank Lloyd Wright's studio continued under the name Taliesin Architects, so still linked to him, but not him.

42

 

[ProjectEnd]

Forget dead architects, it's incredible how many people think living namesakes design things in their offices. Once you've reached a certain size, you're not designing anything.

 

[innsertnamehere]

Forget dead architects, it's incredible how many people think living namesakes design things in their offices. Once you've reached a certain size, you're not designing anything.

Yup. Most buildings by these large firms are at most based off a sketch or two from the namesake architect, if you are lucky.

 

[interchange42]

If those namesake architects are still running their firms, however, it's understood that whatever the firm produces has passed by their eyes and has their blessing. Harder to give that once they're dead.

42

 

[ProjectEnd]

Depending on the firm in question - they're all different - it's more an assurance of quality or a particular aesthetic, rather than a guarantee that each project has been blessed by 'the master'. There are many eponymous firms out there which have projects the namesake has no idea he or she is involved with.