Toronto Ryerson Student Learning Centre | 50.59m | 8s | Ryerson University | Zeidler

[ptbotrmpfn]

Toronto needs some glamour especially on younge. All the projects are really adding to the street view along younge street. much needed. As for the education, how can you say they wasted money there. Do you know someone currently going there? Is there classes going on inside already? JMO, but I feel this certainly adds to younge. what ever its intended purpose is, Its a welcomed design. and im sure they wouldnt lead students a stray with theyre education as they are a well known school im sure they wouldnt cut corners...!?

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

A square covered in glass and the corners cut out isn't that far away from what you'd describe as crap.

By this comparison, you can almost argue St. Jamestown is the new Four Seasons - there aren't even corners cut out in that case.

AoD

 

[Bayer]

The almost pathological need to save a single nickle is so ingrained in the minds of many in Toronto. We are sometimes like the millionaire who sleeps with bundles of cash under his mattress, but chooses to lead a miserly life filled with complaints and resentments instead.

This is precisely what I have disliked the most about Toronto ever since I moved here from Québec 27 years ago. These days, I think it is in public transit that this mentality has been the most damaging. It can be seen in the design of the oldest subway stations, such as College: a single narrow stairway to reach each platform - a small station made by small-minded people with no vision about the future of their city. At least, that is my perception. As for this particular building, I feel good every time I walk by and look at it. Beauty is not a luxury.

 

[P23]

This is precisely what I have disliked the most about Toronto ever since I moved here from Québec 27 years ago. These days, I think it is in public transit that this mentality has been the most damaging. It can be seen in the design of the oldest subway stations, such as College: a single narrow stairway to reach each platform - a small station made by small-minded people with no vision about the future of their city. At least, that is my perception. As for this particular building, I feel good every time I walk by and look at it. Beauty is not a luxury.

I actually think Keele station is the best example of this. It's mostly above ground but it's a windowless concrete bunker.

 

[Midtown Urbanist]

The almost pathological need to save a single nickle is so ingrained in the minds of many in Toronto. We are sometimes like the millionaire who sleeps with bundles of cash under his mattress, but chooses to lead a miserly life filled with complaints and resentments instead.

I remember reading a TorStar (or was it the Globe?) article about how Toronto's millionaires and other high-earners are unique in that they regularly eat at food courts during the day rather than at finer establishments. Would also explain the BMW-at-Walmart phenomenon we have going here too.

 

[modernizt]

The idea that lower-budget architecture would somehow fix the (deeply flawed) austerity mindset of the population and government is naive at best. People can get behind reckless austerity measures all they want, but it won't somehow benefit the rest of the university to lower our standards for architecture and reduce capital budgets for new architectural projects. There is plenty of money floating around.

 

[kotsy]

Pardon the rain drops!


Ryerson Student Centre by kotsy.in.toronto, on Flickr

 

[Forgotten]

There is no arguing that both buildings are highly attractive and I would have perfectly been ok with it if they were privately funded buildings and Ryerson was a private institution. The issue is that they are publicly funded buildings and Ryerson is a public university, and we are in the age of rampant budgetary deficits in which jobs are being cut in the health care system and benefits are being taken away from teachers. And I think that it could have probably cost half of the $112 million they spent to built the SLC if it was just a simple building like the Raymond Chang building. And the money that would have been saved could have been used on more value-add things such as adding more professors to their faculties and/or hiring more staff instead of cutting jobs. I was actually shocked to find out that there are only 6 security staff responsible for the whole campus! And you wonder why you have drug dealers selling weed on campus in plain sight.

The Imaging Center is just a waste of money ($61 million) on prime real estate; the land would have been better used to build a tower to house more classrooms, more student residences or the health sciences building. Instead they build a "museum" that is rarely visited. And I didn't even mention the amount of energy (and $$$) they waste illuminating that thing at night.

You sound more like an envious and jealous Lion than a critic.

 

[mdrame]

Wow. I didn't expect such strong reaction from so many people.

But with all due respect I stand with what I've said. I would compare what Ryerson did with the SLC and the Imaging Center to a politician who uses public funds to buy a $15 apple at a high-end hotel instead of buying a $1 apple at the nearby convenience store.

I am not in anyway saying that only bland buildings should built in Toronto. On the contrary it I would love to see more buildings like the SLC around town BUT NOT FROM A PUBLIC INSTITUTION. All I'm saying is that in this age of austerity we shouldn't be spending wildly like we're Dubai. I understand that most of you are architects or in the real estate sector; so you have a different perspective than I do. But my perspective is that of someone who used to work in a Finance department of a major hospital, and each year during the budgeting process I see dozens and dozens of health care jobs being cut because of budgetary constraints; so when I see a public institution misuse public funds like this, I am outraged because that excess funding could have maybe been used to, for example, avoid those job cuts in other areas of the public sector.

They even cancelled much of the Nathan Philips Square projects because of lack of funding. You don't think some of the excess money spent a the SLC could have easily covered that needed funding to complete the NPS work?

 

[mdrame]

You sound more like an envious and jealous Lion than a critic.

LOL. Why would I be? I own a condo just a couple of blocks from the SLC at Bay and Edward; so this building only helps my property value.
I am just speaking from the point of view of an outraged citizen.

 

[yyzer]

Pardon the rain drops!

kotsy, that's a gorgeous shot of an amazing building...

mdrame... we need to up our game as a city... this is just what the doctor ordered... wouldn't it would be better to be an "enraged citizen" when you see mediocre or bad architecture in town?

... kudos to Ryerson for this beautiful building, and for spending money wisely in a way that will bring a degree of happiness to a city that needs it....

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I am not in anyway saying that only bland buildings should built in Toronto. On the contrary it I would love to see more buildings like the SLC around town BUT NOT FROM A PUBLIC INSTITUTION. All I'm saying is that in this age of austerity we shouldn't be spending wildly like we're Dubai. I understand that most of you are architects or in the real estate sector; so you have a different perspective than I do. But my perspective is that of someone who used to work in a Finance department of a major hospital, and each year during the budgeting process I see dozens and dozens of health care jobs being cut because of budgetary constraints; so when I see a public institution misuse public funds like this, I am outraged because that excess funding could have maybe been used to, for example, avoid those job cuts in other areas of the public sector.

Loaded terms like "misuse" aside, I don't consider well built, inspiring public buildings any less worthy than job in other areas of the public sector. As the apple analogy you've raised - perhaps some of those jobs should have paid less in the age of austerity?

They even cancelled much of the Nathan Philips Square projects because of lack of funding. You don't think some of the excess money spent a the SLC could have easily covered that needed funding to complete the NPS work?

The merit of NPS projects aside (given your take on the cost of SLC, which arguably have a higher level of impact vs. a project that is purely about landscaping and aesthetics), do you really believe that somehow provincial funding would be directed to what is a City of Toronto project?

AoD

 

[mdrame]

Loaded terms like "misuse" aside, I don't consider well built, inspiring public buildings any less worthy than job in other areas of the public sector. As the apple analogy you've raised - perhaps some of those jobs should have paid less in the age of austerity?



The merit of NPS projects aside (given your take on the cost of SLC, which arguably have a higher level of impact vs. a project that is purely about landscaping and aesthetics), do you really believe that somehow provincial funding would be directed to what is a City of Toronto project?

AoD

Ok I'll give you the NPS argument; bad example of my part. It's a diversion from the point I have been trying to make which that I'd rather see my government invest $112 million on people, the city's, province's and country's most important resources, through better health care, education and social services) than spend that money on some building, as attractive as that building might be.

But $112 million on a five-floor building that doesn't even have underground garage? SMH.

If it was a private institution or organization, I wouldn't care what they do with their money. But this is taxpayers' money.

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Ok I'll give you the NPS argument; bad example of my part.

But $112 million on a five-floor building that doesn't even have underground garage? I would rather build a far less interesting building and invest the rest of the money on people, who happen to be the city's, province's and country's most important resources. I'd rather see my government invest $112 million on people (through better health care, education and social services) than spend that money on some building, as attractive as that building might be.

If it was a private institution or organization, I wouldn't care what they do with their money. But this is taxpayers' money.

Actually, your bad example reveals your own priorities quite clearly. At any rate, the building is 8 storey, actually, plus a basement retail level actually. Direct government component of the funding is 45 million, not 112 million. And is it "better" health care, education and social services, or was it higher pay for said providers?

AoD

 

[G.L.17]

Ok I'll give you the NPS argument; bad example of my part. It's a diversion from the point I have been trying to make which that I'd rather see my government invest $112 million on people, the city's, province's and country's most important resources, through better health care, education and social services) than spend that money on some building, as attractive as that building might be.

But $112 million on a five-floor building that doesn't even have underground garage? SMH.

If it was a private institution or organization, I wouldn't care what they do with their money. But this is taxpayers' money.

Why would we want an underground garage here at this intersection, while there's a massive one directly south of it?