Transformation AGO (5s, Gehry) COMPLETE

[interchange42]

If someone can give me a defence of the vandalized, third rate, grubby crap that cheapens and lessens what is a glorious, wonderful addition to the AGO, I'd like to hear it rather than an empty retort. It's this defence of the mediocre that is truly maddening, and why this city will always take one step forward, one back in terms of improving its public realm. Tell me, then, how a context worthy of the building in terms of creating an open piazza (or *something*) of some sort at the expense of unremarkable, neglected and shabby buildings is a *bad* thing. Where does this neurotic, almost pathological fetishization of the cheap and third rate come from? Why is *any* attempt to match the efforts made to create a striking building with a similarly striking, high-quality streetscape sabotaged by the desire to ensure that the most unremarkable elements must somehow be equated with the most remarkable? What, honestly, is the loss to the area with these businesses gone in comparison to something, *anything* being done to showcase Gehry's building as it should, and not hide it amongst clutter and properties that aren't even being maintained by the people owning them now? How much *better* would the area be, if, say a square designed by Gehry had been planned across from it? How much more coherent, more unapologetically *grand* (now there's a term we shy away from these days) would the building be? And before anyone says Toronto Life Square, that isn't the case of expropriation being wrong per se, but more so the execution of what came later. Does anyone, really, *want* what was there before at Yonge and Dundas? And if not, why the defence of what's at Dundas and Beverley now? Because as it stands now, looking at this photo, my only reaction is, man, nice new building, but look at the crap around it. Why didn't they do something about that? I imagine many people will say the same thing, and that's a shame.

So, why, exactly, am I wrong for wanting better than settling for third-rate, for the half-assed?

You are not wrong. Nice rant!

Actually, I would not mind the east and west portions of Dundas, if the part of Dundas in front of the gallery (across) was anything but a huge embarrassment. And for those who think and wish that it will become magically better once the gallery is re-opened, I will gently remind you that the gallery has been there for decades, and the streetscape has just been getting worse and worse.

I am more inclined to agree with alklay: the real crime along Dundas once the AGO is reopened, will be what is immediately north of it. And I don't want to put words in alklay's mouth, so I won't claim to agree here: I for one do not mind the mess to the west. For all of its grubbiness, Chinatown's eclectic, maddening mix teems with life. It may not be at its zenith right now, but high-quality piecemeal redevelopment of some of the buildings could improve while maintaining the lively character of many of our favourite shopping streets.

Across the street from the AGO however? That's another story. Most of those buildings have been neglected for years, and the cumulative effect on the north side there is awful. I have asked myself too if the "new" AGO might finally bring enough business to that stretch of Dundas to entice the local slumlords to finally throw a little money into their hovels, but I am not convinced it will happen either.

That said, I'd like to see 312 through 356 Dundas bought along with 19-31 Darcy Street, all to be replaced by a new urban square with enough of a view to really appreciate the new AGO head-on. A mid-block walkway from Darcy to the restaurants on Baldwin would be a good idea too, and worth the purchase of another couple of properties. Now, where's a philanthropist when you need one?

42

 

[Urban Shocker]

The AGO has long co-existed happily with Chinatown and the neighbourhood to the north. The gallery hasn't called for any of this to be razed in homage to Gehry's addition. Why all the animosity?

 

[syn]

I actually really like that little strip of Dundas. I think it has character, but I also agree the streetscaping and buildings could be cleaned up.

Then again, the same can be said for many areas of Toronto.

 

[interchange42]

What's north of the AGO is rubbish. The occasional building is acceptable, but the overall effect is terrible. That north side is really going to look awful from inside the Galleria Italia.

Let's do a little Hausmannizing of the north side of Dundas.

42

 

[jn_12]

The ugliness of Dundas only amplifies the need for Grange Park to be something greater. Right now the AGO is literally a diamond in the rough. It deserves far better, and if it wants any chance of being a top notch attraction it can't do so in the current neighbourhood landscape.

Does the AGO have any sort of "postcard" appeal? For such a great looking building and investment, one would think they'd want to exploit it. Even if people hate it, at least the Crystal has that clean look that sells. Unless someone can prove me wrong, I haven't seen a great angle that would sell this building as a must-see in Toronto, without having to see its surroundings.

 

[3Dementia]

I'm sure a wide-angle shot from the roof of one of those buildings on the north side (pre-expropriation of course) will fill the "postcard" bill quite nicely.

 

[alklay]

Interchange, you certainly did not put any words into my mouth and you just elaborated on my points.

I would be satisfied though with the removal of the hydro poles, new lighting, a better sidewalk and landlords who properly maintained their properties (heck, throw in some trees and decent tenants in the buildings and you would have a very pleasant and lively street).

I am not sure I want a public square and fear that such is not only not necessary, but would do little to benefit the area (short of getting rid of a lot of blight).

While those properties across from the gallery are not quite the townhomes across from MOMA, they have a lot of potential to add to the AGO experience (as opposed to what they are doing now). The city should take the first step though and fix up the streetscape (please, no year long study, followed by five years of inaction and then 5 more years of obtaining approval and fundraising. We should know how to fix up a small streetscape by now).

 

[interchange42]

I think that as it stands, a postcard shot of the AGO would have to be taken from the air somewhere north of the building: get the whole sweep of the visor in along with the blue titanium box, the skylight, and the wonky stairs behind it, and you have your shot. By being taken over the homes on Darcy or Baldwin all that would intrude on that view would be the peaks of some of the gables in the foreground. For those visiting the AGO on a day-to-day basis however, it would be nice to provide a better spot for an overview.

42

 

[ladyscraper]

I think the reason I disagree is because part of what makes Toronto interesting to the eye is that it is scattered and messy. Something new and important will be right beside something old and maybe dirty. Although each building that is like that by itself seems bad, it creates an overall effect that is interesting and inspiring to me. I grew up in this city and that look is what I have come to associate with it.
If we just steamroll all the older buildings that aren't new and flashy and push all the tenants out then i fear Toronto could end up looking very stale.
If you do it once then you set a precedent to do it over and over.

 

[Urban Shocker]

Don't start up the bulldozers yet, guys! I think that time and the ongoing gentrification process will take care of what some here see as problems. When I first visited the AGO in 1970 most of the streets to the north of it formed a working class neighbourhood that included cheap rooming houses for low-income people and art and university students. Houses, and even streets, were painted in psychedelic colours and there wasn't a sandblasted and reno'd "century home" in sight. It was all hippy all the time. Now look how it has evolved.

Does anyone still buy postcards? I thought all the tourists do video and post stills on Flickr.

 

[Observer Walt]

I think Alklay has hit it. The street and the entire surrounding area is an admittedly messy but interesting mix of residential, commercial, and institutional all mixed in a pot. Some of it is certainly less than attractive, but I really don't trust the City to come up with anything better by expropriating properties on Dundas or up to Baldwin.

The city could make a contribution by looking at the areas which are clearly public as opposed to private. Get the overhead wires underground, in this location as with many others. It would also help to have good sidewalks, without every third or fourth square being patched over with temporary-looking asphalt. And a bit of spiffing up of Grange Park might be nice, including one or two areas (not all of it) being redesigned in a more "formal" layout, complementing the building.

Other than that, leave the area to evolve on its own.

 

[interchange42]

I would only want an urban square on the north side of Dundas if a proper competition were held to find a top-notch design. Otherwise, I wouldn't trust the City either.

42

 

[3Dementia]

I think the AGO will achieve the necessary fame/notoriety... precisely because it has had a loving make-over by a world-famous local boy... and it sits in a "suprising", less than grand neighourhood without "attention! major attraction" type warning or context.

Most "famous" iconic structures disappoint in person (not the Taj) because of their inflated advanced PR. Imagine finding the new AGO after dim sum...

 

[ProjectEnd]

I give you Toronto the half-assed. That entire block west of Beverley should have been expropriated, razed*, and turned into a grand plaza leading into the new AGO. New poles would be nice too, with their maintenance turned over to the AGO or a BIA that can actually make them look presentable and worthy of the new addition.

*waiting for the inevitable defence of decrepit, neglected, shoddy, "full-of-character" decaying retail strips.

We sure have learned much since the days of Robert Moses; or perhaps not.

Just think if that "half-assed" Spadina strip had been turned into a glorious expressway - oh the possibilities! We could even make "grand plazas" so that people would have a chance to see the expressway in all its magnificence.

I won't quote old Jane Jacobs since that is 'soooo 2006' but needless to say, you have some urban planning history to brush up on fiendish.


Also I'm with Shocker about the postcards - the last time I saw any, they were covered in dust and sitting next to some equally sad-looking, plastic CN tower models. They're still there - at the Bay/Charles Convenience Store - "where our stock just might be as old as you are!"

 

[yyzer]

There is absolutely no connection between the Spadina Expressway and a vision for a plaza in front of the AGO......we need more public spaces, I don't think Jane Jacobs would disapprove of a public plaza here;the site north of the AGO would be ideal, imo.....I'm with Fiendish on this one...