[urbanexplorer]

While he didn't design it, he used to belong to the firm that designed it, and was the most illustrious designer of "ugly brutalist structures" in Toronto. And I wouldn't be surprised if you're the sort who's never heard of him.

'Brutalist'? Architect behind U of T Scarborough's Science and Humanities Wing didn't think so

John Andrews, the Australian architect who designed two iconic Canadian buildings — including one at U of T Scarborough — died last week at the age of 88.

utsc.utoronto.ca

The attitude meter is on the high side with this one

 

[AlbertC]

 

[MichelleBrozovic]

I dig it. Looks good.

 

[wmedia]

This is so horrendous it's almost comical. Please, just cover that podium in billboards or SOMETHING.

 

[DSC]

I dig it. Looks good.

Perhaps you could elaborate? Though the majority does not rule in matters of taste, the overwhelming view here is that the base of this building (at least) is ghastly both for how it dealt with what was there before and in its execution. If you dig it, please explain.

 

[MichelleBrozovic]

Perhaps you could elaborate? Though the majority does not rule in matters of taste, the overwhelming view here is that the base of this building (at least) is ghastly both for how it dealt with what was there before and in its execution. If you dig it, please explain.

I'll explain. I think the way the base meets the street is horrendous, BUT the upper part of the tower looks about as good as I hoped it would.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

...I can agree it'll also look good once they remove that cladding.

 

[junctionist]

The tower looks like two buildings competing awkwardly for the spotlight. But it was the street level that took it to a whole new level of offensiveness.

 

[Neil]

A few pages back, someone posted those white walls belonged in a washroom. I'm thinking, yeah, I could pee on that.

 

[LUVIT!]

Are there plans to put signage on the vast white space?

 

[Yegger]

Nothing more screams government oversight like having this be built directly facing City Hall.

Hopefully, moving forward, this becomes a cautionary tale for future recladdings and will to some degree involve review from urban design (or any other department that can comment on architectural impact)

 

[kthing]

Some of the details and the all white base are ugly but I still prefer this over the old concrete and brown tinted windows.

 

[DSC]

Nothing more screams government oversight like having this be built directly facing City Hall.

Hopefully, moving forward, this becomes a cautionary tale for future recladdings and will to some degree involve review from urban design (or any other department that can comment on architectural impact)

The City has no say over the quality or choices made re re-cladding or other such activities. This is clearly a REAL mess and should never have happened but we need to blame our old friend CF not lack of civic oversight. The lower (washroom) floors are really unspeakably ugly and would be even in an industrial park - unless it were an industrial park making public washrooms..

 

[old boy]

My first impression is - why is this in a cast ? My immediate second thought is - what the heck are they thinking ? Why shouldn't the city have a say in what is done around such an important precinct as the Town Square. This isn't some plaza built well out of the public eye.

 

[adma]

Nothing more screams government oversight like having this be built directly facing City Hall.

Hopefully, moving forward, this becomes a cautionary tale for future recladdings and will to some degree involve review from urban design (or any other department that can comment on architectural impact)

And what I find about those who speak up on behalf of the design (or even on *partial* behalf, the "nice tower, shame about the base" party line) is that they seem to have no clue as to context--that is, Old City Hall might as well not exist, New City Hall might as well not exist, the original Simpsons store might as well not exist, all that interplay of urban elements might as well not exist, and heck, the whole context of 1960s Toronto architecture which produced the original tower design might as well not exist. It's like they see nothing more than "old and dated" vs "new and fresh". And it's like it wouldn't matter whether the tower were at Queen & Bay or at, say, Rexdale & Martin Grove--like those doing the commenting are *only* going by photographs. Or it's as if they're not even commenting on a real building; like, this might as well be a well-meaning but misguided "fan rendering" come to life. A 13-year-old kid saying "this is how I'd improve it" while knowing absolutely *nothing* about the background of the building or, really, about architectural and urban history in general, particularly when it comes to Toronto. "Parkin? Who's that?"