Toronto Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts | ?m | 5s | COC | Diamond Schmitt

[Urban Shocker]

At least the sound inside is world-class. Unfortunately many people justify the banality of the exterior with this fact. As Canada's first opera house, it should have been on the same level of visual impact as the AGO.

How isn't it? Not only do we have the glowing beacon of the City Room filled with activity on opera and ballet nights but you can actually see the city from within it. The thick, curved beams and bowed front of Gehry's Galleria Italia are no less impressive from without, but they jointly conspire to block most of the exterior view when you're within and looking along it, and the horizontal wooden slats ( which Gehry wanted to extend even further down the glass front ... ) block the sky. So much glass, so little revealed - it's almost a cruel joke. Diamond kept his big wood statement ( the four storey slatted and gently convex wooden screen ) away from the windows, and the panoramic views through the City Room's glass are uninterrupted. One's an inward-looking starchitectural statement, charming in it's own way, and the other is practical modernism in the service of function. Judging the value everything from the perspective of the slack-jawed pedestrian voyeur strikes me as being as banal as it gets.

 

[old boy]

I agree with most of what you say. There's a helluva lot of bang for the buck in this project. Given the constaints of the budget, we ended up with a great building for the appreciation of sound . There will always be some speculation as to what might have improved the face of the site with a hundred million or so more in the budget ? The University face of the place is not offensive.

 

[junctionist]

It was a wise strategy to invest in the acoustics given the limited budget because it'll make opera more enjoyable, which improves its chances to sustain and improve in popularity. The exterior can and will be changed one day, because a few decades from now people will look at the Queen Street facade and ask "what were they thinking?"

 

[MetroMan]

Given the interior layout, I challenge anybody to come up with a solution for the Queen Street façade that doesn't involve demolishing most of the building.

Not much can be done other than using the empty space as a busy restaurant. That only accounts for half of the Queen st façade. The other half is a brick wall with nowhere to go behind it.

Ideally, I'd like to see the member's lounge extended all the way to York St. across the top and at sidewalk level the building extended out further on to the sidewalk to create a second glazed space like the existing unoccupied one. You could have two restaurants there, creating uninterrupted street presence from the bustling Queen West, passed University, along the way to the Sheraton & NPS, and then The Bay/Eaton Centre.

As it now stands, the hole in the vibrancy of Queen West that was there when the 4SC was a parking lot is still there after it was built. There's a gap in the fabric of this wonderful street and if it weren't for NPS and Eaton Centre pulling people East, University Avenue would be the end of the road for Queen West, not Yonge.

 

[MetroMan]

... which gives me an idea: seeing that UrbanToronto became a think tank for the CityPlace Pedestrian bridge, we could do regular competitions on how to improve existing buildings to make them more architecturally appealing and street level friendly within the constraints of a realistic budget.

I think that the Four Season's Centre would be a good candidate for a first competition.

If anybody has floor plans for the 4SC, I'd be glad to submit the first proposal.

 

[TonyV]

Given the interior layout, I challenge anybody to come up with a solution for the Queen Street façade that doesn't involve demolishing most of the building.

.

First, you're wrong. The interior (auditorium) and exterior are technically separate buildings connected to one another. Recall all the details about how the auditorium portion is resting on gigantic vibration dampers. One really notices that when one moves from City Room to the actual opera interior; in the City Room you can really feel the vibrations from the city around; inside the hall, all is perfectly calm.

Secondly: overkill. While I think Diamond's design is good, it is indeed aloof, I tend to agree with those who say the light treatment would be better, if changes were ever to be made. The Doyenne says nothing should be done --- well, it seems to me she's correct, in that it has been wise to avoid trendiness, if I may paraphrase.

As I've said before, I do like this building but it could have sparked a conversation --- "flirted" as it were --- with the other buildings in the intersection. I would venture to say that would be possible, but it is truly a case of money. We starve our arts institutions in Canada. Why should the arts institutions have monumental homes when they can barely scrape up an operating budget? Diamond doesn't believe in architectural metaphors but he created the perfect Canadian one, there's the irony.

 

[MetroMan]

First, you're wrong. The interior (auditorium) and exterior are technically separate buildings connected to one another. Recall all the details about how the auditorium portion is resting on gigantic vibration dampers. One really notices that when one moves from City Room to the actual opera interior; in the City Room you can really feel the vibrations from the city around; inside the hall, all is perfectly calm.

I'm well aware of how the auditorium is separate from the rest of the building and the methods used to segregate it from the noisy city around it and subway below it.
What I meant is that there is limited space behind the brick wall, so to build a better Queen St façade would require demolishing essential areas of the building.

I recall following the construction and remember that the auditorium is located further south on the site with a 3 storey rectangular box about 30 feet wide running the entire length of the building from University to York along Queen. It's an independent building that houses in sequence from West to East:

Street Level: Subway/PATH entrance -> Ticket booths -> Leasable space (suggested initially as a restaurant) -> Emergency exit -> ** Unknown use behind the brick wall ** -> Sponsor (Range Rover) showcase room.

Second Floor: Henry Jackman Lounge -> washrooms -> a hallway with an unknown use behind it -> Rehearsal Studio.

In theory, it would be possible to demolish this block alone and build an interesting building that not only reinstates its current uses but this time engages Queen St. and does so with a beautiful design, consistent with the CityRoom.

 

[MetroMan]

In fact, here's an illustration that demonstrates that point:

You can see the northern block running along side the auditorium which is its own isolated building.

This view from above also affords clues as to what is behind that brick wall on Queen St. The square next to the fly tower seems to suggest that almost certainly this is the sidestage where props and sets are held during a performance and wheeled out to the stage from there.

You can also see the narrow sliver left of that box which is the hallway that leads to the rehearsal studio.

So there you have it: there could be no demolishing of this block without shutting down the auditorium during construction. Every performance needs the sidestage. I don't think we'll ever see any changes to the Queen st. façade that improves on its interaction with the street.

The only hope is that the leasable space one day becomes a restaurant and that the sponsor showcase turns into a gift shop or a café. The blank brick wall will remain there because it can never be torn down or opened up.

 

[TonyV]

I would give a much higher priority to a redesign competition for the interior of Roy Thomson Hall. That hall has only slightly better than mediocre acoustics. I pay more attention to how a building works than to how it looks on the outside.

I wouldn't shed a single tear if Roy Thomson Hall was gutted entirely inside, and a proper concert hall constructed therein. It never was a success, architecturally or functionally. Someone must stand guard over the existing lobbies, though!

****

I have just this moment returned from a motor trip which required that I travel along congested Richmond Street and turn onto University northbound, wrapping around the opera house. What strikes me is that a truly amazing city has grown up in merely a decade, and people still get hung up on a perceived "dud". I'd get out of that mindframe; this is an amazingly interesting and complex city with a lot to forgive the bad Queen St. exposure of the opera house; we seem to be able to absorb a lot of influences in Toronto, she is no longer a dull city by any stretch. Granted, the Queen elevation of the opera is a problem, this is agreed upon, Metroman. And I hate the blinds on University, they contribute to the aloof feeling.

 

[adma]

It was a wise strategy to invest in the acoustics given the limited budget because it'll make opera more enjoyable, which improves its chances to sustain and improve in popularity. The exterior can and will be changed one day, because a few decades from now people will look at the Queen Street facade and ask "what were they thinking?"

Well, it depends on what kinds of people. After all, there are people today who look at the Nathan Phillips Square walkways and ask "what were they thinking?"...

 

[TonyV]

We starve our arts institutions in Canada. Why should the arts institutions have monumental homes when they can barely scrape up an operating budget? Diamond doesn't believe in architectural metaphors but he created the perfect Canadian one, there's the irony.

Wishing to clarify something here. When I say "we starve our arts institutions in Canada" I am talking about the amount of money the organizations get for operating purposes. Hence I am saying it would be putting the cart before the horse to build a palatial opera house while the opera company always scratches for funds .... same old, same old, with respect to "Canadian traditions".

 

[junctionist]

Well, it depends on what kinds of people. After all, there are people today who look at the Nathan Phillips Square walkways and ask "what were they thinking?"...

I think that people who appreciate the NPS walkways have reservations about the Queen Street facade.

 

[MetroMan]

I've spoken with people familiar with the interior layout and indeed the spaces behind the Eastern wall along the Queen façade are the sidestage and storage areas with access to a "stage behind the stage". There are actually two stages of similar dimension back to back.

This puts to rest any ideas of using the Queen St. streetwall for any dynamic purposes. There is simply no room.

The only hope for that stretch is to have the existing spaces used for commercial, publicly accessible purposes. Like I mentioned above: a restaurant below the Jackman lounge and a café on the corner of Queen & Yonge would add a lot to this pedestrian "black hole" cutting NPS, Eaton Centre & The Bay from the vibrancy of Queen West.

 

[TonyV]

Wishing to clarify something here. When I say "we starve our arts institutions in Canada" I am talking about the amount of money the organizations get for operating purposes. Hence I am saying it would be putting the cart before the horse to build a palatial opera house while the opera company always scratches for funds .... same old, same old, with respect to "Canadian traditions".

Well, it depends on what kinds of people. After all, there are people today who look at the Nathan Phillips Square walkways and ask "what were they thinking?"...

I've spoken with people familiar with the interior layout and indeed the spaces behind the Eastern wall along the Queen façade are the sidestage and storage areas with access to a "stage behind the stage". There are actually two stages of similar dimension back to back.

This puts to rest any ideas of using the Queen St. streetwall for any dynamic purposes. There is simply no room.

The only hope for that stretch is to have the existing spaces used for commercial, publicly accessible purposes. Like I mentioned above: a restaurant below the Jackman lounge and a café on the corner of Queen & Yonge would add a lot to this pedestrian "black hole" cutting NPS, Eaton Centre & The Bay from the vibrancy of Queen West.

So, who would pay for improvements on Queen, MetroMan?. Consider this, the Canadian Opera Company, while they sold every seat last year, still had to dip into their reserves to break even. Here's the news clip from the Globe:

http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news...-its-rainy-day-fund-last-year/article1343045/

This "pedestrian black hole" on Queen West that you refer to really is nasty. In fact, when we go to the opera, we normally avoid walking along that ghastly stretch. What you have now is a testament to pre-2000 Toronto and Ontario attitudes.

- The construction of a new opera in Toronto never was a civic issue, the COC was left alone to fight their "thirty years' war".

- One Ontario government (an NDP one) cut down the Bay Wellesely proposal (too grandiose).

- It is alleged that when Queen/University was hatched, then-mayor Lastman was furious that the COC had firmly spurned his offer of the mainstage in North York (just off of Lastman Square) for a permanent home.

- As the project proceeded, the city administration never took an interest in the new opera house, and never looked at the posibilities of civic improvements to coordinate with the new building, even though the new building was to be within view of Nathan Philips Square.

The opera company acquitted themselves beautifully in the financial circumstances by slaving to just one goal, which was to create an excellent performance venue in which to showcase their art, and in which the audience can appreciate that art. At the start of the project, certain parties bitched and moaned about the lack of civic-mindedness in this project, and the opera company responded, in essence, "fine, show us the money".

I believe things would work out differently now as our design awareness at large is growing, but that excellent opera company of ours really really needed a good auditorium. If ever there are to be exterior changes, it must be a civic effort and a donor would need to be involved. Good luck to all at this point in time of recession.

I'd settle for a decently renovated NPS, and a modest reworking of the opera's Queen facade, and then, let's get on with other things; what we have at this point is probably one of the five top opera facilities on the planet, and a very energetic opera company.

 

[Ladies Mile]

I might be in the distinct minority, but I love the Opera House. It has a warm, gracious interior, an austere but sensible interior and excellent acoustics and seating/sight lines.

I actually have trouble thinking of a better one anywhere (that I've visited at least). Paris is ghastly rococo twaddle, New York is twinkly motel glitter and Albert Hall in London, while not an opera venue, is one of the world's most poorly designed public buildings in terms of function, right up there with Wright's beautiful but perverse Guggenheim Museum.