Amare
Senior Member
Wow I legitimately had no idea the school had a rooftop basketball court. Now this is some real public sector innovation in Toronto!
Toronto CityPlace: Canoe Landing Community Centre & Schools | 15.85m | 3s | City of Toronto | ZAS Architects
- Thread starter ProjectEnd
- Start date
junctionist
Senior Member
It's arguably the finest elementary school building in a generation. It feels European in its architectural expressiveness.
alklay
Senior Member
Can anyone access that rooftop basketball court? Is it open to the public?
AlexBozikovic
Active Member
My review:
ADRM
Senior Member
I think this is nail on the head:
But money doesn’t explain everything. The grey and red aluminum panels on the community centre feel insubstantial; the architects said they deliberately chose them instead of brick. Then there’s that faceted protrusion along the community centre’s north face. In the architects’ drawings it was a pale, wispy thing; in reality, it looks like a stealth bomber that has crash-landed.
I think the aluminum paneling (both the red accents and the stealth bomber bit) give the place a real sense of impermanence and, generally, cheapness. It feels like a continuation of some pretty moribund architecture surrounding it, whereas it should have been the solid centrepiece of what is really a very vibrant neighbourhood.
thaivic
Active Member
To each his own, IMO i think it looks good overall, if there was no colour people would complain that there is no colour, it serves its purpose very well for the community.
ADRM
Senior Member
I don't think it's awful; I might give it a B-, but it should've -- and could have -- been an A.
But this is not a binary choice; I am staunchly in the "ban grey spandrel in Toronto" and "use colour much more often and more tastefully" camps, but I just don't think it was used to positive effect here; overall, the building still reads drab and grey to me, but with little bits of colour tacked on without any real relationship to anything or reason for them. It's particularly odd to me that the architect opted against brick, because there are loads of ways to creatively and tastefully add colour and warmth through tone, orientation, and colour of brick.
For sure it does -- but, again, I don't think "serves its purpose" should be the bar for substantial civic buildings in Toronto. This city is overrun with mediocrity in both its private and public contemporary buildings, so I will bemoan every instance of missed opportunity to do something grand (which is too I think what Bozikovic is doing in the G&M piece).
thaivic
Active Member
I have clients that show me pictures of houses in Rosedale and Forest Hill but want to build it on a beer budget, you can't build to the high standards without the funds that's just a reality, the City and the Province seem to be afraid to spend on buildings like they use to do a long time ago, most condos in Toronto are being built as cheaply as possible and as long as they have clients to purchase nothing will change, some have turned out surprisingly well but the majority are just blah... I do agree that the building could have been better but compared to a lot of the crap that has been going up i will take it, in the end the budget is the budget.
UtakataNoAnnex
Senior Member
The elephants in the room here is the crap buildings that surrounds it. Making this project an oasis in comparison, IMO. I'm pretty sure if this weren't the case, we'd be seeing more of the shortcomings as outlined. /sigh
alklay
Senior Member
I am not convinced by this argument, as good use of materials does not always mean simply just "good materials"/
Would brick been any more expensive than the cheap looking panels they used? Probably not. In fact, it probably would have been cheaper.
thaivic
Active Member
Brick would be more expensive, you are correct that using good material does not translate to better looking buildings, well designed buildings with good materials properly applied is the key. IMO i still like the building not crazy about the Red colour but i believe that they did it to tie in with the Red canoe.
AlexBozikovic
Active Member
The architects from ZAS told me specifically that brick was, at the time, less expensive than aluminum.
They also told me that someone from urban design at the city had a suggestion: they should use precast cladding, so that the building would fit into the neighbourhood.
A lot of cooks were involved here, and a lot of things went wrong. It’s not a disaster. But as ADRM said, it could have - and should have - been great.
They also told me that someone from urban design at the city had a suggestion: they should use precast cladding, so that the building would fit into the neighbourhood.
A lot of cooks were involved here, and a lot of things went wrong. It’s not a disaster. But as ADRM said, it could have - and should have - been great.
Red Mars
Senior Member
Jun 10, 2021
Yegger
Active Member
This building sure has a "front" and a "back". There sure seems to be a lot more of the latter.
someMidTowner
¯\_(ツ)_/¯
I've been working with The Bentway to document their summer art program. Here's an ongoing installation with an interactive play structure at the west side of the building: https://www.thebentway.ca/event/contact-play-public/
