[Northern Light]

Respect to what? There are myriad of buildings around there from different eras representing different styles. So this building in question or it's alt proposal are not really that out of place as being claimed beyond the opinions of it.

Ummm, below is a Streetview photo from when the park was under construction with few trees in the way, allowing a relatively clear view of this section of Front Street:

If you are suggesting to me that it fits in with one of Toronto's best preserved blocks of 19th C retail.........I don't know what to say.

If one were to ignore the cold concrete and bunker like-feel and I don't see why one should............it doesn't match/compliment the roofline even in height, nevermind aesthetics. The second floor proportions are out of step with its neighbours too.

The first level does nothing to extend (in sympathy, not in identical terms) the first level trim work of the adjacent property.

Its about as jarring a non-sequitur as one could envision in every respect from scale, to style, from materiality to vibe.

As for the love-in or hate-on for this building, you are claiming this wildly popular view without citation and/or evidence of any proper survey. Thus this may not be really any different than a few, self-appointed tastemakers who want this place bulldozed to the ground. And this is outside of those who couldn't care less either way and the clueless who have no idea this is a thing. So I am not sure where you are getting this from.

You are welcome to be on be one of the few who appreciate this building. The world ought to have a diversity in taste.

But truthfully, the vast majority of non-architecture geeks (and a majority of those that are) dislike brutalism.

That much is widely known and accepted. I could go find a survey to back that up if you'd like...........but I would tend to file this under general knowledge.

I don't know that anyone has ever taken a formal survey on aesthetic opinions about the SLC.

But I feel entirely confident the building is not well loved; and a great number of people dislike it, as do I.

If you have any evidence to contrary, please feel free to post it, and I will stand corrected.

****

And finally, it would be interesting to see how folks would react if in the end this building was refitted as a library. I gotta feeling though this isn't about the need for a library...

No one is suggesting this is about a library; it was a throwaway comment that if there were no justification for the arts facility, a library would be one welcome public use.

There is a justification for it as an arts facility; but that is neither here nor there when discussing the current building's architectural merits or lack thereof.

 

[condovo]

^^^ A picture speaks a thousand words. What a piece of sh*t. Give me a break with the architectural significance and the social history.

 

[ProjectEnd]

The proposed tower at the northwest corner is ugly, unwieldy and completely disrespectful to Berczy Park directly across the street and the rest of the neighbourhood too. The SLC is a mediocre building that only elitists can love and doesn't deserve the hoops being jumped through to save it. Get rid of it and then there's no need for the added carbuncle either. Two birds with one stone.

"The Queen Anne bedroom community" maybe better applies to other neighbourhoods but that doesn't mean St. Lawrence has no context to respect, historical or otherwise.

The St. Lawrence Centre is universally unloved except for a few, self-appointed tastemakers. I say get rid of it. If the demand and funding are there for a new theatre, I'm all for it. And, as Northern Light pointed out, it doesn't need cutesy, pastiche architecture to fit in. But it doesn't need to be obnoxious either.

If there's not enough demand or funding for a new theatre, there are plenty of other things the neighbourhood does need, like a new library.

Who on earth has any affection for the St. Lawrence Centre other than a few eccentrics in the local Can-Con community and teeny architecture-critic scene? How is this building of global import? Where are the copious articles over the decades that have bothered with it? Which international Brutalist inventory is it on? Who the heck even knows about this building outside Toronto, maybe even outside downtown Toronto? It's a big, fat zero.

Social history? Whose? And now add an odious protrusion to preserve social history?

This building's been giving the middle finger to its neighbours for 51 years. Enough already. Demolition should be the final chapter of its social history.

^^^ A picture speaks a thousand words. What a piece of sh*t. Give me a break with the architectural significance and the social history.

Absolute, ahistorical, pabulum. An embarrassing set of posts that proves little more than you've got an axe to grind. "Self-appointed tastemaker," indeed.

 

[urbanexplorer]

Absolute, ahistorical, pabulum. An embarrassing set of posts that proves little more than you've got an axe to grind. "Self-appointed tastemaker," indeed

Everyone's opinion is valid, let's try not to belittle. I think they're generally speaking for a lot of people, myself included.

 

[Northern Light]

Absolute, ahistorical, pabulum. An embarrassing set of posts that proves little more than you've got an axe to grind. "Self-appointed tastemaker," indeed.

Too much PE.

You're making it personal.

 

[ProjectEnd]

I'm channeling the tone established by @condovo. Happy to calm things down, but this ain't one sided.

 

[interchange42]

There are too many belittling lines regarding the other point of view here: "You are welcome to be on be one of the few who appreciate this building" and "The St. Lawrence Centre is universally unloved except for a few, self-appointed tastemakers" are lines that paint the opposition into a corner. Anyone rebutting those are sentenced to elitist oblivion. If there's any more of that kind of condescension in this thread, people will be taking time outs. State your own thoughts, don't claim to speak on behalf of everyone else, don't put labels on your opposition that they cannot escape from, lighten up.

42

 

[Northern Light]

There are too many belittling lines regarding the other point of view here: "You are welcome to be on be one of the few who appreciate this building"

For the record, there is nothing belittling about that statement, either in fact, or in intent.

I like the posters with whom I was engaging in discussion.

I did not label anyone.

There is nothing wrong with holding a minority opinion; which is exactly what I said.

The only reason it was brought up was in direct response to an assertion about public opinion.

 

[condovo]

There are too many belittling lines regarding the other point of view here: "You are welcome to be on be one of the few who appreciate this building" and "The St. Lawrence Centre is universally unloved except for a few, self-appointed tastemakers" are lines that paint the opposition into a corner. Anyone rebutting those are sentenced to elitist oblivion. If there's any more of that kind of condescension in this thread, people will be taking time outs. State your own thoughts, don't claim to speak on behalf of everyone else, don't put labels on your opposition that they cannot escape from, lighten up.

42

One of the posters here has a bully pulpit that could imply they speak for others. I wanted to make it abundantly clear that they speak neither for me nor for others who may share my POV. My apologies for being too forceful in that regard.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Ummm, below is a Streetview photo from when the park was under construction with few trees in the way, allowing a relatively clear view of this section of Front Street:


View attachment 322736

If you are suggesting to me that it fits in with one of Toronto's best preserved blocks of 19th C retail.........I don't know what to say.

If one were to ignore the cold concrete and bunker like-feel and I don't see why one should............it doesn't match/compliment the roofline even in height, nevermind aesthetics. The second floor proportions are out of step with its neighbours too.

The first level does nothing to extend (in sympathy, not in identical terms) the first level trim work of the adjacent property.

Its about as jarring a non-sequitur as one could envision in every respect from scale, to style, from materiality to vibe.



You are welcome to be on be one of the few who appreciate this building. The world ought to have a diversity in taste.

But truthfully, the vast majority of non-architecture geeks (and a majority of those that are) dislike brutalism.

That much is widely known and accepted. I could go find a survey to back that up if you'd like...........but I would tend to file this under general knowledge.

I don't know that anyone has ever taken a formal survey on aesthetic opinions about the SLC.

But I feel entirely confident the building is not well loved; and a great number of people dislike it, as do I.

If you have any evidence to contrary, please feel free to post it, and I will stand corrected.

****


No one is suggesting this is about a library; it was a throwaway comment that if there were no justification for the arts facility, a library would be one welcome public use.

There is a justification for it as an arts facility; but that is neither here nor there when discussing the current building's architectural merits or lack thereof.

Well, that's a lot to unpack. But quickly, as I suspect the patience for debate on this is starting to wear thin among the hosts. >.<

1) The buildings behind the subject at hand taken on a day that doesn't do any building there justice suggests otherwise...so that's probably not the best example. No...

2) Once again, citation and evidence is needed to support the fact that I am a minority in this position on this to which has not been established outside of opinions. I will agree though, I'm likely one voice in multiple positions on this.

3) Well as how the library suggestion was being used, does read the argument not being made in the best of faith, to put it mildly. As I've said, I am open to other ideas for this place to better serve the community. But be careful what you wish for though, we could end up with a big box Shoppers in the end. Or even worse...

1540 Bloor West | UrbanToronto

1540 Bloor West, Toronto by 1, Arcadis

urbantoronto.ca

/bleh

 

[evandyk]

Condovo obviously feels quite passionate about this building, but nothing struck me as over the top. A bit of hyperbole, maybe. I don't really care one way or another about this one. With most tear-downs, I find the arguments relating to embodied carbon/waste more compelling than heritage, unless there's something unique (in a good way, not this way) about it.

 

[Northern Light]

Well, that's a lot to unpack. But quickly, as I suspect the patience for debate on this is starting to wear thin among the hosts. >.<

1) The buildings behind the subject at hand taken on a day that doesn't do any building there justice suggests otherwise...so that's probably not the best example. No...

2) Once again, citation and evidence is needed to support the fact that I am a minority in this position on this to which has not been established outside of opinions. I will agree though, I'm likely one voice in multiple positions on this.

Rather than point for point here, I will respectfully disagree and move along

3) ........But be careful what you wish for though, we could end up with a big box Shoppers in the end. Or even worse...

1540 Bloor West | UrbanToronto

1540 Bloor West, Toronto by 1, Arcadis

urbantoronto.ca

/bleh

Speaking for myself, I would not endorse tearing this down without knowing what its replacement would be; as this is public land, that is achievable here.

 

[UtakataNoAnnex]

Then agree to disagree here I will too. But thanks for your time and not tarring and feathering me in the process. /bows

 

[officedweller]

For reference, rejected in 2012:

UPDATE: A Sneak Peek at the St Lawrence Centre Redevelopment | UrbanToronto

Leaked conceptual renderings show a potential redevelopment scheme for a completely rebuilt St Lawrence Centre for the Arts in Downtown Toronto. See what Diamond + Schmitt Architects are working through.

urbantoronto.ca

 

[Northern Light]

For reference, rejected in 2012:

UPDATE: A Sneak Peek at the St Lawrence Centre Redevelopment | UrbanToronto

Leaked conceptual renderings show a potential redevelopment scheme for a completely rebuilt St Lawrence Centre for the Arts in Downtown Toronto. See what Diamond + Schmitt Architects are working through.

urbantoronto.ca

And as well it should have been!