Toronto Waterfront Innovation Centre | 53.03m | 11s | Waterfront Toronto | Sweeny &Co

[Torontovibe]

We only have one Central Waterfront and once it's developed, we have to live with it. You would think the city would appreciate that and demand great architecture and design. We were originally promised great buildings on the waterfront but once things got going, we quickly discovered that those promises were just empty words. The city and developers appear to have little interest in creating a great district or great architecture. The only thing anybody seems to care about is making money and so what if we destroy our last bit of Central Waterfront.

It's sad that so few people really love this city! Everybody seems so quick to sell it out, to make a fast buck, including our politicians. Some days, it's tough being a Torontonian who loves his city!

 

[ptbotrmpfn]

I don't live there but always wanted to. But ya I hear ya. We don't need bad project in this city or we'll end of like Detroit

 

[salsa]

The same Design Review Panel that killed the previous design because "there was a confusion of identity with the Ryerson Learning Centre".

Yeah well, with with the redesign I see a confusion of identity with a 905 business park.

 

[old boy]

We only have one Central Waterfront and once it's developed, we have to live with it. You would think the city would appreciate that and demand great architecture and design. We were originally promised great buildings on the waterfront but once things got going, we quickly discovered that those promises were just empty words. The city and developers appear to have little interest in creating a great district or great architecture. The only thing anybody seems to care about is making money and so what if we destroy our last bit of Central Waterfront.

It's sad that so few people really love this city! Everybody seems so quick to sell it out, to make a fast buck, including our politicians. Some days, it's tough being a Torontonian who loves his city!

The developers have just figured out how to make a lot of money through repetition ie mass production. A lot of us do care a lot about Toronto but we're not the developers. City Hall is all about penny pinching and has been for decades, as have been the other levels of government. Hell, we have a problem even maintaining our public spaces let alone creating them. I think the phrase, " knowing the cost of everything and the value of nothing " was invented by a Toronto politician. I think if you asked most people what they think of all the shiny new development downtown, they'd say it is pretty impressive. The traffic congestion on the other hand would be the big downer. These big developers are making a lot of dough in the city, and it would be great to see a few spend some more of it on the design end. Hell, that could be their real legacy.

 

[interchange42]

The same Design Review Panel that killed the previous design because "there was a confusion of identity with the Ryerson Learning Centre" and "the identity of the building needs to be unique" also stated that "it’s an Innovation Centre and should be the most Innovative building in Toronto".

I hope that they're happy with the box that they got instead. The result is what happens with design by committee. This crap cannot be allowed to occupy such a prominent space on our waterfront.

The first version of the deserved to be told to go back for a re-think. 1) It reminded everyone of the Ryerson SLC, some people here even calling it a rip-off of it, 2) the eastern two-thirds of it were dull as this second version is, and 3) (and probably worst) its staircase intruded into the alignment of the Sugar Beach walkway: you would not have seen straight down the double row of trees from Queens Quay, and the new Sugar Beach North extension would also have been cut off from the rest of the park. What kind of half-baked plan was that?

So, after the WT DRP went and told them "it’s an Innovation Centre and should be the most Innovative building in Toronto" last time, I seriously doubt they'd give this version their support. Aquavista went to the WT DRP 4 times before it cleared the process. I predict this version of the Innovation Centre is going to be ripped to shreds.

42

 

[Torontovibe]

The first version of the deserved to be told to go back for a re-think. 1) It reminded everyone of the Ryerson SLC, some people here even calling it a rip-off of it, 2) the eastern two-thirds of it were dull as this second version is, and 3) (and probably worst) its staircase intruded into the alignment of the Sugar Beach walkway: you would not have seen straight down the double row of trees from Queens Quay, and the new Sugar Beach North extension would also have been cut off from the rest of the park. What kind of half-baked plan was that?

So, after the WT DRP went and told them "it’s an Innovation Centre and should be the most Innovative building in Toronto" last time, I seriously doubt they'd give this version their support. Aquavista went to the WT DRP 4 times before it cleared the process. I predict this version of the Innovation Centre is going to be ripped to smithereens.

42

I hope you're right!

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

To those who were whining that the original design looked too similar to the Ryerson building, I hope you are satisfied now. Because why copy a great building when you can always just copy the same boring shite that you would find in a Mississauga business park.

My reaction exactly.

Heaven forbid we copy a design of an excellent building in a different part of the city.

 

[stjames2queenwest]

I would think that when a development is told to do something more interesting... They would listen.

The first design was not good either.

 

[junctionist]

Many suburban office parks have attractive buildings. Developers often use sleek cladding and achieve clean modern design. It's the environment of large parking lots, second-rate (or non-existent) public spaces and car-oriented design in general that makes the office park environment unattractive. That's not what we're building on the waterfront. Even if the buildings look like office park buildings, if they meet the street and surrounding public spaces well, we can still have a great neighbourhood and waterfront.

Are more architecturally sophisticated buildings desirable? Yes, but if we're building a downtown neighbourhood from nothing but empty brownfields, a lot of resources have to go into providing basic services rather than subsidizing design. Landlords and tenants have to shoulder the risks of an unproven location. The good thing is that in building relatively small commercial buildings, they can be redeveloped easily. It will allow for organic growth.

 

[ADRM]

Many suburban office parks have attractive buildings. Developers often use sleek cladding and achieve clean modern design. It's the environment of large parking lots, second-rate (or non-existent) public spaces and car-oriented design in general that makes the office park environment unattractive. That's not what we're building on the waterfront. Even if the buildings look like office park buildings, if they meet the street and surrounding public spaces well, we can still have a great neighbourhood and waterfront.

Are more architecturally sophisticated buildings desirable? Yes, but if we're building a downtown neighbourhood from nothing but empty brownfields, a lot of resources have to go into providing basic services rather than subsidizing design. Landlords and tenants have to shoulder the risks of an unproven location. The good thing is that in building relatively small commercial buildings, they can be redeveloped easily. It will allow for organic growth.

But the developer isn't providing basic services; the city is. And this isn't a case of developing a building with the intention of it being redeveloped (if I follow the point) - that's extremely rare. This is what it is: a bland and uninspiring building that misses one of its primary missions: to serve to inspire, among other things, and it surely won't do that, at least through its exterior design.

 

[christiesplits]

I have added known emails to AOD's list of WT Design Review Panel members:

Bruce Kuwabara, Chair
Partner, Kuwabara Payne McKenna Blumberg Architects
bkuwabara@kpmbarchitects.com

Paul J. Bedford, Vice Chair
Urban Mentor and Retired Chief Planner, City of Toronto
paul.bedford@utoronto.ca

George Baird
Partner, Baird Sampson Neuert Architects

Claude Cormier
Principal, Claude Cormier + Associés

Brigitte Shim
Partner, Shim-Sutcliffe Architects
brigitte.shim@daniels.utoronto.ca

Betsy Williamson
Partner, WILLIAMSONWILLIAMSON Inc.,
betsy@wwinc.ca

Jane Wolff
Associate Professor
Director, Master of Landscape Architecture Program, University of Toronto
jane.wolff@daniels.utoronto.ca

Donald Schmitt
Architect and Principal, Diamond and Schmitt Architects Inc.
dschmitt@dsai.ca

Pat Hanson
Founding Partner, gh3

Peter Busby
Managing Director, Perkins + Will, San Francisco
Peter.Busby@perkinswill.com

Alka Lukatela
Acting Director of Urban Design - City of Toronto



Also, please see below AOD's contact info for WT staff:

re: relevant WT contacts

CEO
William Fleissig
wfleissig@waterfrontoronto.ca

Meg Davis
Chief Development Officer
mdavis@waterfrontoronto.ca

Christopher Glaisek
VP, Planning and Design
cglaisek@waterfrontoronto.ca

- and Christopher Glaisek is fairly active on Twitter:
https://twitter.com/cglaisek

AoD

 

[am29]

Response I received from the email I sent:


"Dear AM29,


Thank you for taking the time to send us your comments. I have been noticing similar comments online. I appreciate that there are strong opinions about this design, and we do always welcome feedback.


Menkes’ Innovation Centre is about creating innovative, collaborative work spaces for tech and creative businesses. The design is not yet final, and will likely be shaped by input from these tenants. The latest version of the renderings for the Waterfront Innovation Centre are part of the evolution of the building’s design as it goes through the Design Review Panel process.


Again, many thanks for your feedback.


Kind regards,

Mira Shenker
Waterfront Toronto"

 

[ProjectEnd]

Some classy PR (bullshit spin) from Menkes here:

“The Waterfront Innovation Centre represents the next generation in progressive office development that meets the unique company culture, workspace configuration and technological needs of innovative companies.”

Peter Menkes
President, Commercial / Industrial, Menkes Developments Ltd.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Some classy PR (bullshit spin) from Menkes here:

Yeah, he forgot to add the word "placeless" and "timeless" in it.

AoD

 

[Adjei]

The design got Torontoed...