The four short-listed teams in Toronto's Nathan Phillip Square redesign competition unveiled their projects last night to a council chamber-filling crowd at city hall. I'll have a full critique of the schemes in tomorrow's Reading Toronto. My short take on the projects is that the best provide a vision of urban life that is as iconic as Viljo Revell's admired design. The ones that fall short may have been unnerved by the Finnish Architect's masterful, mid-20th Century design vision. Ultimately, the proposals fracture along two dominant force lines: public space as a return to nature or public space as an embrace of the urban. Attached are some images from the projects.


Plant Architect Inc., Toronto. View of proposed plaza from the Sheraton Centre.


Plant Architect Inc., Toronto. Looking west to stair/stage combination.


Rogers Marvel Architects, New York. View looking south towards berm element.


Rogers Marvel Architects, New York. View looking north from top of berm.


Baird Sampson Neuert Architects, Toronto. Axonometric view of plaza looking east.


Zeidler Partnership Architects, Toronto. View looking north over garden.

1. Wow…how am I the first to comment? I would trust any of these firms to do a fine job and all of those proposals offer something unique but as someone who does not hold the original Revell design (and yes I realize the as-built version may not be true to the original design) with the type of hushed reverence of the city’s architects I can say that there are always two problems to the square. Firstly, and most contentiously, the raised mezzanine that borders the square is heavy-handed and seems nothing more than a monument to concrete. The thing is closed to the public and apparently only serves as a way to house the city’s pigeons. I think we should embrace the idea of a true intervention by either tearing it down and replacing it with a tree-lined border/thoroughfare or softening it significantly by making an elevated park (such as proposals for NYC’s abandoned elevated rail line). Even if, as said, the square’s design is merely refined and cleaned up (which would be a significant improvement) the second and more important consideration would be to implement a far better, more cohesive programme for the site. Too often, the City Hall either resembles a flea market or a used car lot, not by its architecture but by the hodge-podge of events, “improvements” or plantings that have been thrown there. If the City Hall can’t learn to respect their own front yard then how can anyone else?

   Posted by Peter  on  02/21  at  04:24 PM
3. PS - more images can be seen at: CBC.ca
   
   Posted by Peter  on  {comment_date format=’%m/%d’}  at  {comment_date format=’%h:%i %A’}
Posted by Peter  on  02/21  at  04:26 PM

<< Back to main