I think people have been wanting some news here for a bit.....

So, who am I not to be accommodating?

Renders:

1770306824655.png


1770306872745.png



1770306900913.png


Some details:

1770307057583.png

1770307096788.png


There's a lot more detail in this 109 page report to the U of T's Planning and Budget Ctte:


@Paclo
 
Ironic.. as they demolished the original school of practical sciences building (engineering) to pave way for Med Sci, which in hindsight would obviously stand as heritage today
View attachment 686950
The ironic part is that the Engineering building sat on this part of the Med Sci building that they are looking to demolish, not under the part they are looking to keep.

Otherwise, my immediate opinion of the MVRDV design is that it is too tall (covering up the remaining Med Sci block and yet not responding to it), and yet also rather unassuming and contextless. If you dropped it into Liberty Village and called it a new office building, I doubt anyone would bat an eyelash.

(Even the Med Sci building's design was cognizant of its placement across from Convocation Hall in terms of its height.)
medical-science-building-university-toronto-04-toronto-society-architects-scott-norsworth-e1675373347571.jpg
 
At least the corners are curved, so those relate to Convocation Hall.
And the height of the podium facing King's College Circle and its vertical elements relate to the height and columns of the colonnade at Convocation Hall.
 
Not so sure about the scale of this here.
At least the corners are curved, so those relate to Convocation Hall.
And the height of the podium facing King's College Circle and its vertical elements relate to the height and columns of the colonnade at Convocation Hall.

Interesting thoughts.

Observation/Question:

The height at the outer limit of the base on the King's College Road side alternates between 1 and 2s (which seems odd to me), its also below the height of the building to the south. Even if you wanted to articulate the massing a bit, (make it appear as more than one volume, I don't think I'd do it that way).

What do you think of:

a) Extending the volume out to the existing 2s proposed height universally, with no change above?

b) Doing the same, but matching the height of the building to the south at 3s?

c) See b, but because you've gained some ft2 on those first 3 levels, give back that space above, by either, eliminating the top floor or increasing the setback from the 4 floor up by 1M.

The object of the above being to hide the overall height at close distance, making it appear more contextual.
 
Interesting thoughts.

Observation/Question:

The height at the outer limit of the base on the King's College Road side alternates between 1 and 2s (which seems odd to me), its also below the height of the building to the south. Even if you wanted to articulate the massing a bit, (make it appear as more than one volume, I don't think I'd do it that way).

What do you think of:

a) Extending the volume out to the existing 2s proposed height universally, with no change above?

b) Doing the same, but matching the height of the building to the south at 3s?

c) See b, but because you've gained some ft2 on those first 3 levels, give back that space above, by either, eliminating the top floor or increasing the setback from the 4 floor up by 1M.

The object of the above being to hide the overall height at close distance, making it appear more contextual.

To me it's less a question of height and more one of massing/bulk; I just don't think that west side is very well resolved, and that's the one that really has (or Ideally should have) a dialogue with Convocation Hall and the little north-south road down to College. And maybe I'd feel a bit differently if I liked the building better, but honestly I just think it looks a bit bland -- I'm not sure why you hire MVRDV for something that looks like DSAI (on its best day, granted to MVRDV) would produce.
 

Back
Top