my understanding is that the change is more of a temporary thing to house the theatre arts program, which is currently in a building that is literally falling apart. From my understanding it'll switch back to retail after they find a more permanent home in a few years.
 
innsertnamehere said:
my understanding is that the change is more of a temporary thing to house the theatre arts program, which is currently in a building that is literally falling apart. From my understanding it'll switch back to retail after they find a more permanent home in a few years.
Click to expand...

I don't see it being a big deal even if they don't convert it back to retail and kept the underground space for academic and related purposes considering the amount that has already been spent.

AoD
 
picard102 said:
Adding height to a building, isn't taking something away that's been promised.
Click to expand...

Actually it is - in the way a slightly taller building would impact the surroundings, however slight those impacts would be. Just like however slight the impact of this change on the bigger picture would be. The city is not legally obliged to grant this request (hence it is an application) but for all the energy spent on that, one would be far, far better off focusing on the cluster-f that is the block south of it.

AoD
 
Last edited:
picard102 said:
So frst, they get out of their commitment to the heritage aspects of the site, now they want out of the retail requirements?
Click to expand...

Yeah, that's pretty sly and underhanded of them. I certainly wouldn't trust what they say in the future. I think all future negotiations with Ryerson have to have iron clad conditions with harsh financial penalties, if they try to back out of their agreements. These guys have just proven to be shady. (and we all know, it ain't the first time)

Was there not a good reason for the city to require retail along Yonge Street? If Ryerson agreed to it, how can they just be allowed to change the plan so easily? If we allow Ryerson to do as they please, how can we expect private developers to not pull the same crap? Ryerson has a whole lot of under developed land it can build on. It doesn't have to impact retail along Yonge Street to meet its needs. Why not focus on the dead part of Church Street, that Ryerson sits on? That part of Church Street needs a huge redevelopment. It's a badly designed street right now, much of that due to Ryerson.
 
Last edited:
They also could have dump Snohetta and gone with P+S. I guess with Page + Steele, you would want them to slap on a couple large neon records overtop whatever they design.
 
Indeed. All the spilt milk over what is arguably a local (if not international) architectural icon even before completion, while resources are not brought to bear deal with the tragedy that was the deterioration, collapse and subsequent fire that utterly wrecked Empress. Priorities, you know. This is why we can't have nice things.

AoD
 
Last edited:
innsertnamehere said:
the way they paid for that fancy exterior is spending absolutely nothing on interior fitout..
Click to expand...

I'd rather have interesting, engaging and well-designed interior spaces than poor architecture with extensive finishing. Drywall/carpet/extensive finishing does not good architecture make.

Looking forward to spending time in these new spaces. Somewhere additional to kick back, socialize, study, and call home on campus.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top