Toronto Jack Layton Ferry Terminal and Harbour Square Park | ?m | ?s | Waterfront Toronto

In looking at the survey on the www.waterfrontoronto.ca site, I would rank their list of criteria in the following order:
1. Promote continuous waterfront access.
2. Iconic/welcoming terminal
2. Enhance Harbour Square
4. Improve queuing areas for ferry passengers
5. The other options tied for 5th.

I ranked queuing issue only at 4 as I believe all the proposals will provide significant improvements to this so I lowered it in my list of priorities. (i.e. advance ticketing for specific departures so no need to line up.)

As for the specific design features that I like:

I like the DS+R boardwalk for its continuous waterfront access through the site and over the Yonge Slip. I also like its beach and its ticketing plan of offering sales terminals around its canopy to buy ferry tickets.

I like the KPMB nicely designed terminal with its green roof and lookout areas.

I like Stoss' pools/hot tubs/sun deck features as well as its waiting area, and the entrance at the foot of Bay Street where you can see the water. (Note: If in this Stoss plan you cannot see the water from Bay Street then I'd prefer KPMB or DS+R's terminals instead.) As long as we can minimize how prominent the parking garage is so that the public can see the water or terminal I'll be happy.
 
Last edited:
You'll see from the link at the top of our page that our huge dataBase file for this project is now live for you to peruse the images, a way to see them all in one place! Front page story is here.

42
 
88drums said:
I love the idea of an accessible green roof and/or some kind of vista over the harbour, but I'm surprised at the inclusion of elevated walkways by both Clement Blanchet et al. and Quadrangle et al. This design is rarely inviting and almost always under-utilized. Look at how the often-vacant walkway at city hall disconnects NPS from the city. And while obviously not for pedestrian use, look just metres to the north at how the Gardiner disconnects our waterfront from the city. Must we make this mistake again?
Click to expand...

It's funny how I look at it in a completely different way. I actually thing Clement Blanchet's elevated walkway would be perfect for this location. While looking at it, I couldn't help but be reminded of a walking on the Chelsea Highline just last month, particularly where it overlooks the Hudson River. It would be a neat lookout of the lake and the city.(https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Th...2!3m1!1s0x89c259c7840fb4e5:0x583f615c850a3c91)

I think the proposal would be very different from NPS because it would be lined with trees and will have a more powerful view than just City Hall and a few CBD buildings.

I also kind of like the direct connection between York and Yonge.

Besides that though I think all proposals are strong (even Quadrangle) and would be happy with any of them.
 
I'm torn between Diller + aA, and KPMG. I think they are both amazing, however I'm concerned that these designs will eventually be watered down by the penny pinchers at city hall. Isn't there a budget for all this?
 
salsa said:
I'm torn between Diller + aA, and KPMG. I think they are both amazing, however I'm concerned that these designs will eventually be watered down by the penny pinchers at city hall. Isn't there a budget for all this?
Click to expand...

I think the proponents were tasked with proposing designs that can be undertaken in phases, as funds become available. Can Stoss and DSR have a love-child now, please?

AoD
 
With regard to the architectsAlliance proposal, the fact that it has a street running through it from the north, kills it for me. I think people are taken in with the canopy and have overlooked the poor landscaping for the site.

I feel many of these proposals fail to address how the lines for boarding and tickets are going to function. There seems to be idealized concepts of ferries simply pulling up to docks, with little regard to how the summer crowds are going to buy tickets and wait comfortably. Heck, the Stross concept does not even appear to shelter those who are waiting with tickets in hand.

Elements that I like:

Winter skating rinks (this will make the area something to use for four seasons);
Trees, trees and more trees....with areas to simply lay on the grass; and
A decent connection to both the waterfront east and west of the site.

Whatever we end up getting, it will be better than what is presently there (and we know it will take over a decade to be built).
 
Canadian Chocho said:
It's funny how I look at it in a completely different way. I actually thing Clement Blanchet's elevated walkway would be perfect for this location. While looking at it, I couldn't help but be reminded of a walking on the Chelsea Highline just last month, particularly where it overlooks the Hudson River. It would be a neat lookout of the lake and the city.(https://www.google.ca/maps/place/Th...2!3m1!1s0x89c259c7840fb4e5:0x583f615c850a3c91)

I think the proposal would be very different from NPS because it would be lined with trees and will have a more powerful view than just City Hall and a few CBD buildings..
Click to expand...

Point taken, though I respectfully disagree.

The High Line is a whole different ball game. It weaves directly through the urban realm of a dense, and IMO one of NYC's most interesting neighbourhoods, breathing down the necks of buildings old and new. Being enclosed on all sides prevents it from acting as a barrier between anything in particular (how the Gardiner might look in decades to come?). It's also 'organic' in sense that it represents the evolution of pre-existing built form and is a fabulous example of adaptive reuse.

Meanwhile, these walkways appear linear and undifferentiated: trees and Harbour Square behind you, the water in front. You'd get basically the same views all along; there's no compelling reason to walk from one end to the other.

Most importantly, the proposals without these walkways offer beautiful vantage points of their own. I think a pedestrian pathway running up the terminal's sloping green roof is a much more elegant way to get lake views than a sidewalk on stilts.
 
Stoss for me.

All of the other proposals contain overhead features or buildings that would seem to re-emphasize the city's traditional barriers to the waterfront (ie. Gardiner, rail corridor), which, of course, is the exact opposite of what waterfront toronto is hoping to achieve.
 
The Jack Layton Ferry Terminal on the mainland should look and have the feel of the islands, and let visitors assume the islands are have already started on the mainland.

The Harbour Landing proposal by the KPMB Architects would be my #1 choice. The Cloud Park proposal by Stoss Landscape Urbanism would be my #2.
 
First reactions only...

- I'm not crazy about KPMB's green roof concept. Not that i'm against green roofs, only that the design idea camouflages the architecture. The brief was to make a statement here, not blend in.

- I'm reacting favourably to Diller's pavilion. It defines a sense of place and creates a strong statement, yet seems practical at the same time. The materials are appropriate and the geyser clock has the potential to be a real landmark, i'd go even bigger with it.

- Some of the Stoss ideas are interesting and create a sense of destination for the area itself ... now why hasn't anybody thought of the shore-side hot springs before? It creates usage in the winter and I'd go bigger with it. The terminal itself does feel like an afterthought.

- The two-level designs seems unnecessary.

Somebody mentioned that none of the designs reference the islands at all or create any sense of anticipation of them. This is valid. I don't think we need any faux olde-timeyness here but the islands shouldn't be ignored out of the equation. Duh!
 
W. K. Lis said:
The Jack Layton Ferry Terminal on the mainland should look and have the feel of the islands, and let visitors assume the islands are have already started on the mainland.
Click to expand...

That's what I like about the Diller proposal. It reminds me of the modernist pavilions on the island (although that's probably the only thing I really like about the proposal):

https://www.google.ca/maps/@43.6276...!3m5!1e1!3m3!1sK4V4w8IIDUNDY0TZ8yoDNw!2e0!3e5

Here are some other thoughts:

Diller: Love the pavilion, but that's about it. The road they bring up to the building will become a permanent parking lot for idling taxis and buses.

Clement Blanchet: Ugh. The walkway looks like a tribute to the Gardiner Expressway. Why the hell do we need an elevated walkway when we have a perfectly fine boardwalk that doesn't require stairs or an elevator to get to?

Quadrangle: Big collection of useless 'stuff'. Elevated walkway? Needless second storey which acts as a further barrier to the lake? The proposal creates this narrow stretch that will likely become chaos during the summer rush.

Stoss: Pretty inoffensive. My one concern is the lack of rooftop. One of the major problems with the current layout is the sun beating down on you while you wait for the ferry to arrive. I wouldn't want to count on a thick tree canopy developing to remedy this problem. The success of the trees at sugar beach are kind of the exception that proves the rule in Toronto.

KPMB: My choice for the competition. It looks like the best organization of space among all of the proposals, particularly in terms of crowd control. While the green roof hides the building from the outside, the wooden roof underneath could be quite iconic. There's something very nautical feeling about the undulating wood, which fits well with the heritage ferries.
 
Up until you mentioned it the Diller proposal was my favourite, but I hadn't noticed that road.

Why would they allocate so much space for vehicles? It's going to happen exactly like you said. If anything it should be a curb-less road with consistent paving all the way across. The Honest Ed's proposal is planning on doing this, I don't see why the same treatment couldn't be applied here.

If the Diller proposal goes ahead as-is, I imagine huge amounts of wasted space and commotion as people try to drop off and pick up their families in their cars.

Nothing says island life like chocking fumes, loud horns and angry people, right?
 
None of the proposals would go forward exactly as is. They are all concepts. No reason to turn against a whole proposal because of one component. Just pick your favourites and identify what you have reservations about.

42
 
Finally getting a proper chance to look through these in detail.

The KPMB proposal blows the rest out of the water, in my opinion. The others, apart from Diller/aA, are very weak.
 
Good point, I'll have to highlight that point in feedback. Otherwise I love the proposal.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top