[ADRM]

Has Christopher Hume commented on it? Isn’t he our local and most well know critic of archecture and all things urban design related?

I haven't seen him comment, but emails and/or Twitter mentions to both he and Alex Bozikovic, tagging both Waterfront Toronto and Menkes Life (which is their very-active-as-of-semi-recently public-facing Twitter account) could be helpful.

 

[christiesplits]

I haven't seen him comment, but emails and/or Twitter mentions to both he and Alex Bozikovic, tagging both Waterfront Toronto and Menkes Life (which is their very-active-as-of-semi-recently public-facing Twitter account) could be helpful.

I am very hopeful that Hume writes about it. Afterall, he had a piece rightly lambasting Corus Quay in 2010:

https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2010/10/01/corus_quay_mistake_by_the_lake.html

 

[DSC]

I am very hopeful that Hume writes about it. Afterall, he had a piece rightly lambasting Corus Quay in 2010:

https://www.thestar.com/entertainment/2010/10/01/corus_quay_mistake_by_the_lake.html

Of course, by time he wrote it was already built so it did really do any good.

 

[ADRM]

Long-time lurker that has registered for no other reason than to ask what I can do to help oppose this building from being built in its current architectural form - is there someone I can email?

Also, what happened at the DRP? While I see articles discussing the DRP's views on a variety of projects, I haven't heard anything about how the meeting went for the WIC. I hope someone stood up and stated the obvious: that this building needs to be architecturally re-designed.

There's no single magic bullet, but it is legitimately possible to move the needle if enough people raise enough stink, both privately and publicly. There are a few ways to do that.

1) Emails to the people involved. The more people we can get on this forum (and those outside of it, of course) to email the following folks, the better. The decision-makers (and proponent) need to know that people are alive to this and care about it. Send the same email to/CCing all of the following people explaining your opinion that this looks like an an uninspiring, suburban office-park-looking dental centre rather than a future innovation hub on our waterfront, and that you want to see world-class architecture on a waterfront that's running out of opportunities for that.

Waterfront Toronto
- Will Fleissing (CEO): wfleissig@waterfrontoronto.ca
- Leslie Gash (VP, Development, and name associated with this project on the DRP agenda): lgash@waterfrontoronto.ca
- Kristina Verner (VP, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity): kverner@waterfrontoronto.ca
- Christopher Glaisek (SVP, Planning and Design): cglaisek@waterfrontoronto.ca

Local Politicians
- Lucy Troisi (local councillor): councillor_troisi@toronto.ca
- Tom Davidson (Lucy Troisi's EA): Tom.Davidson@toronto.ca
- Kelly Sather (Lucy Troisi's constituency assistant): Kelly.Sather@toronto.ca
- Peter Lovering (Lucy Troisi's constituency assistant): Peter.Lovering@toronto.ca
- Denzil Minnan-Wong (Waterfront Toronto board member): councillor_minnan-wong@toronto.ca
- Peter Webster (Denzil Minnan-Wong's constituent assistant): Peter.Webster@toronto.ca

Menkes (developer)
- Wendy Booth (SVP, Leasing): wendy.booth@menkes.com
- Andrew Boughner (VP, Leasing): andrew.boughner@menkes.com
- Jason Menkes (VP, Commercial and Industrial): jason.menkes@menkes.com
- General Inbox: info@menkes.com

Sweeny&co (architect)
- General Marketing and Media inbox: media@sweenyandco.com
- General Inquiries inbox: info@sweenyandco.com

Waterfront Toronto Design Review Panel members (if you can find their emails on their practice websites)
- Paul J. Bedford (Chair), Retired Chief Planner, City of Toronto
- Betsy Williamson (Vice Chair), Partner, Williamson Williamson: betsy@wwinc.ca
- George Baird, Partner, Baird Sampson Neuert Architects
- Claude Cormier, Principal, Claude Cormier + Associés
- Brigitte Shim, Partner, Shim-Sutcliffe Architects
- Pat Hanson, Founding Partner, gh3
- Chris Reed, Partner, STOSS Landscape Urbanism: cr@stoss.net
- Peter Busby, Partner, Perkins + Will
- Eric Turcotte, Partner, Urban Strategies: eturcotte@urbanstrategies.com
- Janna Levitt, Partner, LGA Architectural Partners: janna@lga-ap.com
- Jeff Ranson, Executive Director, Toronto 2030 District
- Nina-Marie Lister, Graduate Program Director and Associate Professor in the School of Urban + Regional Planning at Ryerson University: nm.lister@ryerson.ca

Journalists
- Alex Bozikovic (Globe architecture critic): ABOZIKOVIC@GLOBEANDMAIL.COM
- Christopher Hume (Star architecture critic): chume@thestar.ca

And to make it less abstract, you could consider including links to other innovation centres around the world where the architecture matches the ambition to illustrate to the decision-makers the quality of design you expect to see on your waterfront; you could include The Chayi Industrial Innovation Center; or Toronto's own Bergeron Centre (featured in the New York Times, no less); or the Botswana Innovation Hub; or Boston's 88 Seaport; or MVRDV's plan for Hamburg's Innovation Port; or, hell, even Sweeny's original design for this very building (I'd certainly take a Ryerson SLC copy over the current proposal here)!

2. Tweets at the people involved. Same deal as above, but tagging and/or mentioning the same list of folks; include photos both of the blandness proposed here and the international best practice designs we deserve on our waterfront.

 

[christiesplits]

Terrific list ADRM. I've added three more emails in bold.

- Paul J. Bedford (Chair), Retired Chief Planner, City of Toronto: paul.bedford@utoronto.ca
- Betsy Williamson (Vice Chair), Partner, Williamson Williamson: betsy@wwinc.ca
- George Baird, Partner, Baird Sampson Neuert Architects
- Claude Cormier, Principal, Claude Cormier + Associés
- Brigitte Shim, Partner, Shim-Sutcliffe Architects: brigitte.shim@daniels.utoronto.ca
- Pat Hanson, Founding Partner, gh3
- Chris Reed, Partner, STOSS Landscape Urbanism: cr@stoss.net
- Peter Busby, Partner, Perkins + Will: Peter.Busby@perkinswill.com
- Eric Turcotte, Partner, Urban Strategies: eturcotte@urbanstrategies.com
- Janna Levitt, Partner, LGA Architectural Partners: janna@lga-ap.com
- Jeff Ranson, Executive Director, Toronto 2030 District
- Nina-Marie Lister, Graduate Program Director and Associate Professor in the School of Urban + Regional Planning at Ryerson University: nm.lister@ryerson.ca

 

[SunriseChampion]

E-mail storm commencing.

 

[christiesplits]

Curious if anyone has received any feedback? Nadda from any of the DFP members. Some positive feedback from Bozikovic.

 

[interchange42]

DRP members would never email you back, and there's a chance that none of them would read it. They're on the panel to give expert advice, not reflect the views of the public. (Some of them might read the emails out of curiosity though…)

42

 

[ADRM]

They're on the panel to give expert advice, not reflect the views of the public.

I'm not so sure all of them would agree with that (knowing a couple of them myself). At least some of them would, I think, tell you that they're lending their time and expertise to the panel to give expert advice such that the public (and the private users of the projects on which they provide critiques and advice) might be more likely to wind up with a better finished product, and the city richer as a whole.

I know, too, that experts in the field often express surprise (and in some cases near bewilderment) that people are paying attention to and are passionate about things in their realm. Those in architecture and urban design are, of course, often criticized for being too removed from the practical daily implications of their creations, and some individuals in those fields, in my experience, are acutely aware of and actively trying to fight that perception.

I wouldn't expect an email response from them, but I also wouldn't dismiss a lack of response as evidence of ambivalence on their part.

 

[ADRM]

Curious if anyone has received any feedback? Nadda from any of the DFP members. Some positive feedback from Bozikovic.

Same response mix for me.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Given how the DRP have evaluated the project previously, I figure them getting emails from the public expressing disappointment about this must be at least mildly amusing.

AoD

 

[interchange42]

I'm not so sure all of them would agree with that (knowing a couple of them myself). At least some of them would, I think, tell you that they're lending their time and expertise to the panel to give expert advice such that the public (and the private users of the projects on which they provide critiques and advice) might be more likely to wind up with a better finished product, and the city richer as a whole.

I know, too, that experts in the field often express surprise (and in some cases near bewilderment) that people are paying attention to and are passionate about things in their realm. Those in architecture and urban design are, of course, often criticized for being too removed from the practical daily implications of their creations, and some individuals in those fields, in my experience, are acutely aware of and actively trying to fight that perception.

I wouldn't expect an email response from them, but I also wouldn't dismiss a lack of response as evidence of ambivalence on their part.

As I said, some of them will be curious about the emails, and they may very well be happy to see engagement from the populace at large, but none of them are going to give any advice that doesn't square with their expert opinion. If notes happen to arrive suggesting changes that are within their wheelhouse, and if they were to agree, then those things are likely going to be expressed at the meeting anyway.

I know members of the City's DRP better than I do WT's (other than one of them), and I do know that the City's DRP members are overall pretty happy that UT is at the meetings to spread the word… but I frankly think that our correspondence has a better chance of getting traction from the higher-ups in the hierarchy - the ones who become spokespeople for the organizations and who end up on occasion being held to account in public situations like City Council meetings or one-on-ones with reporters. You'll likely only ever get responses from the local Councillor or Mayor or the CEO of Waterfront Toronto. Planning Department officials might respond to questions about procedure, but no much else. I say spend your time contacting those who have some political clout: those are the people who are supposed to be advocating on behalf of people like you and me, and for whom there is a system in place to effect some action.

42

 

[ponyboy]

This building is unimaginative, but so is the idea that these innovation centres are good use of public funds, and will likely seed cutting edge enterprises and economic dividends for Canada. Most of the Canadian publicly funded incubators/innovation centres I've seen are nepotism and corporate welfare disguised as innovation, prominently featuring photo-ops, back slapping with wine/cheese events, and usually some kind of arts twist so that well connected artists get work. It's primarily a jobs program, sprinkling around money widely but never really picking winners based on fevered competition. The government ties it all together with a seven layer cake of fully pensioned bureaucrats to make sure it is a complete mess.

The way we do innovation is like the Space Launch System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System), but Elon Musk's SpaceX goes it alone and does it for 1/1oth the costs and with better technology. Apologies for the rant.

 

[ADRM]

This building is unimaginative, but so is the idea that these innovation centres are good use of public funds, and will likely seed cutting edge enterprises and economic dividends for Canada. Most of the Canadian publicly funded incubators/innovation centres I've seen are nepotism and corporate welfare disguised as innovation, prominently featuring photo-ops, back slapping with wine/cheese events, and usually some kind of arts twist so that well connected artists get work. It's primarily a jobs program, sprinkling around money widely but never really picking winners based on fevered competition. The government ties it all together with a seven layer cake of fully pensioned bureaucrats to make sure it is a complete mess. This building is appropriate for

The way we do innovation is like the Space Launch System (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Space_Launch_System), but Elon Musk's SpaceX goes it alone and does it for 1/1oth the costs and with better technology. Apologies for the rant.

This is a private development.

 

[Gido]

There's no single magic bullet, but it is legitimately possible to move the needle if enough people raise enough stink, both privately and publicly. There are a few ways to do that.

1) Emails to the people involved. The more people we can get on this forum (and those outside of it, of course) to email the following folks, the better. The decision-makers (and proponent) need to know that people are alive to this and care about it. Send the same email to/CCing all of the following people explaining your opinion that this looks like an an uninspiring, suburban office-park-looking dental centre rather than a future innovation hub on our waterfront, and that you want to see world-class architecture on a waterfront that's running out of opportunities for that.

Waterfront Toronto
- Will Fleissing (CEO): wfleissig@waterfrontoronto.ca
- Leslie Gash (VP, Development, and name associated with this project on the DRP agenda): lgash@waterfrontoronto.ca
- Kristina Verner (VP, Innovation, Sustainability and Prosperity): kverner@waterfrontoronto.ca
- Christopher Glaisek (SVP, Planning and Design): cglaisek@waterfrontoronto.ca

Local Politicians
- Lucy Troisi (local councillor): councillor_troisi@toronto.ca
- Tom Davidson (Lucy Troisi's EA): Tom.Davidson@toronto.ca
- Kelly Sather (Lucy Troisi's constituency assistant): Kelly.Sather@toronto.ca
- Peter Lovering (Lucy Troisi's constituency assistant): Peter.Lovering@toronto.ca
- Denzil Minnan-Wong (Waterfront Toronto board member): councillor_minnan-wong@toronto.ca
- Peter Webster (Denzil Minnan-Wong's constituent assistant): Peter.Webster@toronto.ca

Menkes (developer)
- Wendy Booth (SVP, Leasing): wendy.booth@menkes.com
- Andrew Boughner (VP, Leasing): andrew.boughner@menkes.com
- Jason Menkes (VP, Commercial and Industrial): jason.menkes@menkes.com
- General Inbox: info@menkes.com

Sweeny&co (architect)
- General Marketing and Media inbox: media@sweenyandco.com
- General Inquiries inbox: info@sweenyandco.com

Waterfront Toronto Design Review Panel members (if you can find their emails on their practice websites)
- Paul J. Bedford (Chair), Retired Chief Planner, City of Toronto
- Betsy Williamson (Vice Chair), Partner, Williamson Williamson: betsy@wwinc.ca
- George Baird, Partner, Baird Sampson Neuert Architects
- Claude Cormier, Principal, Claude Cormier + Associés
- Brigitte Shim, Partner, Shim-Sutcliffe Architects
- Pat Hanson, Founding Partner, gh3
- Chris Reed, Partner, STOSS Landscape Urbanism: cr@stoss.net
- Peter Busby, Partner, Perkins + Will
- Eric Turcotte, Partner, Urban Strategies: eturcotte@urbanstrategies.com
- Janna Levitt, Partner, LGA Architectural Partners: janna@lga-ap.com
- Jeff Ranson, Executive Director, Toronto 2030 District
- Nina-Marie Lister, Graduate Program Director and Associate Professor in the School of Urban + Regional Planning at Ryerson University: nm.lister@ryerson.ca

Journalists
- Alex Bozikovic (Globe architecture critic): ABOZIKOVIC@GLOBEANDMAIL.COM
- Christopher Hume (Star architecture critic): chume@thestar.ca

And to make it less abstract, you could consider including links to other innovation centres around the world where the architecture matches the ambition to illustrate to the decision-makers the quality of design you expect to see on your waterfront; you could include The Chayi Industrial Innovation Center; or Toronto's own Bergeron Centre (featured in the New York Times, no less); or the Botswana Innovation Hub; or Boston's 88 Seaport; or MVRDV's plan for Hamburg's Innovation Port; or, hell, even Sweeny's original design for this very building (I'd certainly take a Ryerson SLC copy over the current proposal here)!

2. Tweets at the people involved. Same deal as above, but tagging and/or mentioning the same list of folks; include photos both of the blandness proposed here and the international best practice designs we deserve on our waterfront.

Leave it to Jared, Wendy, Andrew, Jason, and the Menkes team hog tying Sweeny. While the city, WT, and DRP roll over and ask to be done next.

Meanwhile, Zaha in Macau shows what a pass through type area could be with a little love form developers.

Photo Cred: Timmy727
https://www.instagram.com/timmy727/