Toronto Ripley's Aquarium of Canada | 13.11m | 2s | Ripley Entertainment | B+H

[Landscape design ftw]

All good points and I certainly exagerate in saying Toronto has the provinces majority, but it by far and away has the highest population density, and Niagara is certainly the more internationally known site than Toronto to be sure. I can say that during peek tourist season anyone who has just had to deal with Torontos terrible traffic that of the 401 or 403 and is now realizing that what they thought might have been a relaxing day touring the country side has just turned into a 3 and a bit hour nightmare drive is less likely to want to stop in the middle and prolong the experience.

I Am a supporter of the closer to the waterfront idea, But when it comes down to iether 1 having an aquarium with some international draw, or 2 not having the aquarium at all I have to go wiht option 1.

Last bit for now is to state the Aquarium is going where its going, and is going to turn out however, the only part left really to debate is the design. with the grade changes of both ground and ceiling level of the surounding landscape and the architectural vernacular being that of 1800 somethings train house with a back drop of the 1970 concrete of CNT and Sky Dome being roughly some combination of rectalinear and curvalinear, its presents very interesting oppurtunity. Anyone can clearly see the current design was the result of a ten year old child left with about a hundred lego blocks of various shape and a hot glue gun. This is definately not what I would want representing Canadas largest city. I Believe without a doubt that green roof should be worked into this now an interesting idea might be considering the incorporation of the proposed Ontario water exhibit could be a rooftop marshland with a waterfall comming off it, you could also revitalize wha ti think is an ugly salmon pond feature. having worked at the skydome that fountain barely runs and is generally covered in pigeons and their feces.

 

[Maltag]

All good points and I certainly exagerate in saying Toronto has the provinces majority, but it by far and away has the highest population density, and Niagara is certainly the more internationally known site than Toronto to be sure. I can say that during peek tourist season anyone who has just had to deal with Torontos terrible traffic that of the 401 or 403 and is now realizing that what they thought might have been a relaxing day touring the country side has just turned into a 3 and a bit hour nightmare drive is less likely to want to stop in the middle and prolong the experience.

I Am a supporter of the closer to the waterfront idea, But when it comes down to iether 1 having an aquarium with some international draw, or 2 not having the aquarium at all I have to go wiht option 1.

Last bit for now is to state the Aquarium is going where its going, and is going to turn out however, the only part left really to debate is the design. with the grade changes of both ground and ceiling level of the surounding landscape and the architectural vernacular being that of 1800 somethings train house with a back drop of the 1970 concrete of CNT and Sky Dome being roughly some combination of rectalinear and curvalinear, its presents very interesting oppurtunity. Anyone can clearly see the current design was the result of a ten year old child left with about a hundred lego blocks of various shape and a hot glue gun. This is definately not what I would want representing Canadas largest city. I Believe without a doubt that green roof should be worked into this now an interesting idea might be considering the incorporation of the proposed Ontario water exhibit could be a rooftop marshland with a waterfall comming off it, you could also revitalize wha ti think is an ugly salmon pond feature. having worked at the skydome that fountain barely runs and is generally covered in pigeons and their feces.

Hahaha you are the ten year old child actually, as evidenced by your post. It's nice that you're contributing though. Well, bye.

 

[bar1967]

All good points and I certainly exagerate in saying Toronto has the provinces majority, but it by far and away has the highest population density, and Niagara is certainly the more internationally known site than Toronto to be sure. I can say that during peek tourist season anyone who has just had to deal with Torontos terrible traffic that of the 401 or 403 and is now realizing that what they thought might have been a relaxing day touring the country side has just turned into a 3 and a bit hour nightmare drive is less likely to want to stop in the middle and prolong the experience.

I Am a supporter of the closer to the waterfront idea, But when it comes down to iether 1 having an aquarium with some international draw, or 2 not having the aquarium at all I have to go wiht option 1.

Last bit for now is to state the Aquarium is going where its going, and is going to turn out however, the only part left really to debate is the design. with the grade changes of both ground and ceiling level of the surounding landscape and the architectural vernacular being that of 1800 somethings train house with a back drop of the 1970 concrete of CNT and Sky Dome being roughly some combination of rectalinear and curvalinear, its presents very interesting oppurtunity. Anyone can clearly see the current design was the result of a ten year old child left with about a hundred lego blocks of various shape and a hot glue gun. This is definately not what I would want representing Canadas largest city. I Believe without a doubt that green roof should be worked into this now an interesting idea might be considering the incorporation of the proposed Ontario water exhibit could be a rooftop marshland with a waterfall comming off it, you could also revitalize wha ti think is an ugly salmon pond feature. having worked at the skydome that fountain barely runs and is generally covered in pigeons and their feces.

It is like one very long run on sentence.....

 

[marcus_a_j]

I Believe without a doubt that green roof should be worked into this .

At the public meeting a while back (Feb. 2010, I think?) I asked about this in the context of the City's new green roof policy. The answer given by the proponent was that a green roof was considered, but given the additional weight it would not be feasible for this specific structure. A white roof was being pursued at the time and I believe still is.

 

[low_bidder]

apologize for my lack of understanding and ignorance here - but I guess that means someone's been picked to build it... any idea who that might be? details etc?

The tender is open to 4 general contractors; PCL, EllisDon, Kenaidan and Ledcor.

 

[Tewder]

This aquarium is not intended to be the thing that puts Toronto on the tourism map. We aren't Atlanta. Not everything needs to be "world class" (whatever that means), and as far as I'm concerned it will be a fantastic addition to the depth of our tourism product, which is all it needs to be.

I don't think anybody could really argue with you, it's just that it's a little disappointing to see a somewhat second-rate facility planned for a city that could definitely do with a first-rate one. Toronto is definitely on the radar of some for its urban attributes but in terms of your more standard tourist fare there isn't too much here that registers... the CN Tower obviously but who could ignore that?

 

[Landscape design ftw]

Hahaha you are the ten year old child actually, as evidenced by your post. It's nice that you're contributing though. Well, bye.

Right well, while I'm typing from my smart phone grammar is not always my biggest concern, and really ten years old? Your going to bring less than inspired diatribe into a forum discussing the topic at hand? you can iether contribute or sit in the stands.

 

[Landscape design ftw]

No one is sayign that the aquarium is going to be Torontos featured tourist atraction, But seeing as how this city has one continual stream of architecturally disapointing projects starting with something ANYTHING, to try and get the ball rolling on getting the public more heavily involved in our city's appearance is preferable. A city doesnt need every last feature to be groundbreaking, but having the more visited and advertised places brought to some kind of standard is something alot of other very popular tourist destinations around the world have done

Green roof- Yes weight always seems to be the biggest argument against green roof construction. If you have seen the proposed waterfront rehabilitation plans almost everything is green roof and green wall oriented, with the building techniques and materials we have around it this technologically rich society we live it really isnt as big factor as people make it out to be. Now I havent studied architectural engineering in school but I have read a bit on the subject having friends involved in field and long term vs just about any other solution green roofs pay off. In 30 years when the whole area is green rooved and green walled I would rather not see one more attraction of this city fall by the way side because its exterior is totaly un appealing.

 

[Ramako]

No one is sayign that the aquarium is going to be Torontos featured tourist atraction, But seeing as how this city has one continual stream of architecturally disapointing projects starting with something ANYTHING, to try and get the ball rolling on getting the public more heavily involved in our city's appearance is preferable.

I take it that you're not a fan of the ROM, AGO or Gardiner Museum designs.

 

[Landscape design ftw]

I take it that you're not a fan of the ROM, AGO or Gardiner Museum designs.

I'm a fan of the AGO that is a good design, I dont know anyone who is a fan of the Crystal attached to the ROM its a friggin disaster. The Gardiner museum I have no particular qualms with it just doesnt have any character to me, if we wanted to copy paste aspects of Frank loyd Wirght designs then why even get a Designer, google sketch up and ten first year students from OCAD would suffice. The OCAD building is one more example of misguided enthusiam.

My comments also look into the past. Toronto has destroyed so many old and beautiful buildings just to have one more cookie cutter glass structure after another thrown up. I'm not against "progress" but it can be done in style. We can learn from the mistakes and successes of other large city's not the least of which would be New York and Chicago. If anyone has had the chance to see Chicago's Millenium Park you'll understand exactly what I'm talking about.

 

[low_bidder]

I am glad Ripley's is proceeding with this building.

I think the patrons of the CNTower/Skydome Etc Etc. who are dragging kids around with them will make great use of this Aquarium just as it is designed.

Not every building we decide to proceed with is going to be an architectural masterpiece nor should they be.

Function first... then design

Neither of which is a factor if there isn't a viable business behind it.

 

[Tewder]

That's a pretty mundane approach, and one that great cities do not follow. Paris? nope. Chicago? nope. Toronto is just too big and too important to treat itself this way. We deserve better: function, form and a strong business model. All are possible at the same time, believe it or not.

 

[Ramako]

Am I the only one that genuinely likes the design?

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Am I the only one that genuinely likes the design?

No, but this site is more about kvetching than praising. (e.g. the whole 2nd rate aquarium theme in this thread, when no one has a friggin' clue what they plan to showcase in the way of fishies.)

The bottom of the CN Tower is pretty bleak right now -- blue construction fences, tired parkettes -- so this will be a very welcome change.

 

[Landscape design ftw]

haha love that you used the word kvetching. The CN tower is bleak no one can argue that, that is because it was built during a period of architecture apply named brutalism. conrete turds. which is great if you love cyber punk semi post apocolyptic settings. Toronto has a chance to redevelop the whole area stretching down to waterfront and stretching east to west from the don valley to ontario place. The aquarium has a great oppurtunity to set the tone as one of the first big developments for the tourism side of things. Follow the tone being set by things like the sound garden and sugar beach. If it just goes the route of cheap and fast, it'll end up like the Gardiner expressway or our roads in general.... an eye soar badly in need of a facelift or demolition.

theres a very considerable diffence between art for the sake of art, and art that focuses on harmonzing funtion with character. and as Tewder stated above its not like we expect unfeasable things that have never been tried before, but it would be nice to see that we can atleast emulate a similar quality and quantity of forethought to that of other city's comparable to ours.

there is an idea in place right now for that very thing that you can see in this link- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=bEQiNXXgu4g - unfortunately our current mayor would rather see that area turned into an NFL stadium. something which if you care to read a few economic reports on other NFL stadiums built within city's would like criple us economicaly.