First Waterfront Place | Approved | 8 st | Downtown [Archive]

catcher_of_cats

March 1st, 2007, 03:28 PM

Here is another issue of TEDCO screwing around with the revitalization of the waterfront. It will be interesting to see how this will turn out, especially if they want to start construction by this June. Has anyone heard anything else about this or seen proposed renderings?

Drama looms down by the lake

Mar 01, 2007 04:30 AM
Christopher Hume

A showdown is looming on the waterfront. At stake is nothing less than the look, feel and form of future development along Lake Ontario. No one can say how it will end, but already there are deep concerns about whether waterfront regeneration will live up to expectations.

The story starts – as it so often does in this part of town – with TEDCO (the Toronto Economic Development Corp.). The municipal agency has never bought into the vision of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp. and has devoted enormous resources to fighting the TWRC, at one point hiring local architect Jack Diamond to prepare a parallel precinct plan for the area known as the East Bayfront.

Now it has turned once again to Diamond's firm, Diamond and Schmitt Architects, to design a building on land TEDCO controls at the foot of Jarvis St.

Though no one will say who the tenant is, it will bring much-wanted knowledge workers to the waterfront. The bad news is the building in which they will work. Given that it will be one of the first buildings constructed in the name of waterfront revitalization, it has to set a high standard. The general consensus, however, is that it doesn't.

"This is the first test of the waterfront corporation," says respected Toronto architect and chair of the TWRC design review panel Bruce Kuwabara. "I guess I thought there was going to be a design competition for the first building. Why wouldn't we have set some design standards for the first building? It's so important to the credibility of the TWRC."

TWRC president John Campbell says the corporation "supports the project." But he also acknowledges that, "We recognize that the first project on the waterfront has to be great." However, he insists, "The design is still at the conceptual stage."

He also points out that the design review panel has established a subcommittee to deal with the TEDCO building, code named Project Symphony.

TEDCO has been a thorn in TWRC's side from the start and despite a memorandum of understanding, its agenda is strictly economic; as an agency it clearly has nothing invested into the idea of waterfront revitalization. Indeed, TEDCO is moving ahead as fast as possible with Project Symphony, and hopes to start construction in June. That doesn't leave much time for the architecture of the building to be redone to meet the expectations of the design review panel.

TWRC officials admit they are frustrated by the attitude and actions of TEDCO. But because it holds the title to the land and because the design panel is merely advisory, it can theoretically carry on regardless.

Members of the York Quay Neighbourhood Association are also unimpressed with what they have seen.

"It's got to be urban," says Kuwabara. "It's got to be sustainable. It's got to be beautiful. It's got to be full of life. When people see mediocre architecture on the waterfront, they will be really angry. It's all about the branding and identity of the waterfront. It will become a very significant issue."

And as Kuwabara makes clear, "They say they haven't designed the building yet, but they're moving ahead with the project."

None of this bodes well for waterfront revitalization. It raises the question of why TEDCO hasn't been reined in by the city, specifically by Mayor David Miller, who made waterfront redevelopment an election issue and who insisted he be given a seat on the TWRC board.

Yes, it's important to get jobs on the waterfront, but it's more important to get things right. With its attitude of let's just get something going as soon as possible with as little public input as possible, TEDCO is jeopardizing the whole point of the revitalization process.

"I've lost a lot of sleep over this, more than anything else," Kuwabara admits. "We've got to start thinking bigger."

urban 2.0

March 1st, 2007, 03:59 PM

... this city is a joke. Seriously. Out of control departments. Nobody has respect for the public.

I think it's all the old boy's club and nepotism run amuke.

Port Authority, TEDCO, Island Airport, all out doing their own thing. Nobody listens to the elected people at city hall.

Everyone is out to cover their ass and protect their jobs. Why doesn't the Province/Feds give more money and control to the cities? Cause it would put their departments out of work -- and they would be the ones who would have to downsize.

Everyone wants their finger in Toronto's pie. Police chiefs in Windsor are now complaining that the Provinces extra money to fight guns and gangs is causing a rise in gangs and guns in their city - so they want a share of the money Toronto is getting!!

O.k. Rant over.

p5archit

March 1st, 2007, 05:31 PM

I think the fact that TEDCO still exists, is a testament to the ass-backwards politics that run this city and country. Its a shame and very frustrating that we have so little control in this city and its arms length agencies. An agency like TEDCO should have been disbanded and removed long before the TWRC was to take control of the waterfront lands and for exactly the reasons stated in the article.

Now its a power struggle, with TEDCO undermining the TWRC's and the city's efforts to promote the waterfront vision. The worst part is that they (city and TWRC) are helpless to do anything against this and any other project TEDCO wishes to go ahead with, because they are the title holders of those lands and can do and build what they wish!

Also, if the TWRC knows about this why are they pushing or lobbying to get this f-ing project stopped or at least put under the TWRC banner? Why are they so passive about this? It makes me think that in the end, no one really cares, as long as we do something- and anything is better than nothing..WTF???

It also irritates me to no-end that Jack Diamond, who is very involved in the waterfront revitalization process (being part of the WEST 8 TEAM) wouldn't have seen this request from TEDCO as somewhat odd? Someone who took part in one of the major competitions to revitalize our core waterfront and won, doesn't tell TEDCO that this is a bad idea, or at least that he refuses unless he is working with the TWRC? You would think that he would want the best for the city- maybe he thinks he is the best- actually I think he believes he is so underrated and with this project he would show the city that his ego supersedes the city's and TWRC's authority-with the help of TEDCO..

Back-assward I tells ya!!

p5

valantino

March 1st, 2007, 06:16 PM

^methinks you're being a little rash - remember the author is Hume who would want nothing more than to see the plan fail

TWRC was clearly given development control the last time the two agencies locked head over this property so this should be considered as nothing more than an act of deparation by TEDCO with the chance of construction without approval being 1 in a 1000

While TEDCO has being a thorn in the backside over the East Bayfront masterplan, it would be economically ass-backwards to disband them or, worse still, incorporate them into the TWRC

urban 2.0

March 15th, 2007, 12:43 AM

Implementing Waterfront Plans
Proposed Commercial Development in East Bayfront

Tuesday, March 27, 2007
7:00-9:30 p.m.
Metro Hall Rotunda
55 John Street, Toronto

Commercial development has an important role to play in revitalizing Toronto’s waterfront. The first proposed development in the East Bayfront is for a commercial proposal known as "Project Symphony" located on a parcel of land municipally known as 125 Queens’ Quay East at the foot of Jarvis adjacent to the Jarvis Street Slip. The public is invited to this meeting to review and provide feedback on the design concept proposed for the building, as well as the vision for how the building and surrounding open space interact with the public.

This meeting is being hosted by Councillor Pam McConnell (Ward 28 Toronto Centre-Rosedale), and the Toronto Economic Development Corporation (TEDCO) in conjunction with the City of Toronto. Diamond and Schmitt are the project architects.

If you would like further information about the mee ting and/or proposed development, please contact Carlo Bonanni, Manager of Planning Services, TEDCO, at (416) 981-1927.

Taller, Better

March 15th, 2007, 08:20 AM

Interesting, urban. Thanks for posting this...

urban 2.0

March 15th, 2007, 08:41 AM

So any guesses at what the main client will be?

I bet some tech firm?

catcher_of_cats

March 15th, 2007, 10:06 PM

Can an admin merge this thread with the other thread of the same name?

Jaye101

March 16th, 2007, 08:29 AM

Tada!

phunky

March 16th, 2007, 09:54 AM

Can someone please briefly tell me what this is all about. I read the articles but didn't really get it.

Filip

March 16th, 2007, 03:34 PM

Grrr screw jetlag I'm up at the crack of dawn...

Ok, basically, at the end of Jarvis street you have this great big plot of land. Long ago, the idea was for CanWest to make a splashy big studio/office complex, but the plan fell through due to them wanting way too many city subsidies.
Today, the project is called Project Symphony and seems to be in a similar boat as the old Project 24/7 proposal (CanWest), so we can expect most likely a big tech firm or a media giant.
Since it's a Diamond and Schmitt we can expect something reserved yet grand and institutional. I give this project thumbs up!

phunky

March 16th, 2007, 03:48 PM

Taller, Better

March 17th, 2007, 05:57 PM

How was the trip, Fil? Did you have a great time?

Filip

March 28th, 2007, 03:00 AM

Renderings are up for Project Symphony over on UT

Well, I'm thoroughly dissapointed - I like the whole atrium idea, but the architecture is SO Markham chic that I might as well go drown myself in the Jarvis Slip. Not a good way to start off the construction of East Bayfronts.

Some info: It should be breaking ground in July - along with the rest of East Bayfronts.

From jayomatic on UT:

http://www.jayomatic.com/pics/symphony.jpg

http://www.jayomatic.com/pics/context.jpg

Here are the details I learned so far.

Lighthouse element on jarvis slip corner which would emit some sort of light. Using LED or other technology.

Most of the ground floor is retail or cafe related. Glass canopy along edges.

1100 Workers, many clues leading to perhaps bell globemedia as a tenant but nothing revealed.

2 buildings with large atrium in middle with a vegetation wall. Large urban square along jarvis slip. Planning along Jarvis slip still to come.

Does not include building facing Queens Quay.

Groundbreaking July! Other east bayfront parks starting around the same time.

Thoughts

Boring..... Uninspiring... Something that could be at home in Markham.

Sorry for the bad images. Dark room. Tried to keep camera still.

Tuscani01

March 28th, 2007, 03:25 AM

All the secrecy for that?

p5archit

March 28th, 2007, 03:55 AM

Any idea who the architects for this project are? What is the square footage?

And finally what the fuck is this monstrosity? I can understand why this project was shrouded in so much secrecy-they didn't want anyone to complain that they are setting the bar really low. This should be a great precedent to follow...

p5

SpatulaCity

March 28th, 2007, 05:07 AM

that looks pretty horrific.

Filip

March 28th, 2007, 05:24 AM

Diamond and Schmidt.. I didn't know they were capable of 90's chic Markham.. Actually I didn't know anyone was... Gah I'm pissed.

Epi

March 28th, 2007, 06:21 AM

Too bad it couldn't be 80s Markham, cause then at least we'd have Superdave. That does look pretty horrific though, which is funny because Toronto's standards are so high now. Anywhere else that would be an awesome building.

phunky

March 28th, 2007, 06:56 AM

Meh I don't find it that bad. The rendering might not be exactly how it will look either.

taal

March 28th, 2007, 07:06 AM

I’d hold any judgments until we see a better render – it’s very hard to say much from what we have seen.

kettal

March 29th, 2007, 05:30 AM

I still don't know what this is.

Is there an actual symphony involved?

Metro Gnome

March 29th, 2007, 06:00 AM

Here's a link to a union forum site which has a very lengthy commentary on Project Symphony and the other contoversial Toronto project, the FilmPort film studio complex, and how both of these apparently secretive municipal projects are coincidentally blemishing the waterfront and killing the film industry of Toronto.

http://bluecaller.org/showthread.php?p=4205&posted=1#post4205

phunky

March 29th, 2007, 06:38 AM

how is the FilmPort killing the film industry?!? I would say it's adding to it in a huge way.

globetrekker

March 29th, 2007, 07:06 AM

how is the FilmPort killing the film industry?!? I would say it's adding to it in a huge way.

Exactly my thoughts.

kettal

March 29th, 2007, 07:33 AM

Okay I think I get it now:

The site for "Project Symphony" is on land currently occupied by Cinespace film studios.

TEDCO has ordered Cinespace to close so they can demolish the studios for Symphony.

urban 2.0

March 29th, 2007, 08:39 AM

From the other forum...

Project Symphony
I left the meeting feeling nauseous, having been in a room with Mr. Diamond, TEDCO, and company. Toronto is faltering. This meeting typified the problem.

Project Symphony is nothing to get excited about architecturally. The building itself is two stunted towers flanking a solarium, somehow reminiscent of Jeff Steiner's pate. It's best face is toward the lake, the west face is less distinguished, and one would assume that the north and east faces are even less distinguished than the two that were shown. What we'll see from the city-side will be discouraging to say the least. It's design is commercial and right at home in any mall. Mr. Diamond hasn't set the bar very high for the first building of the waterfront renewal. It's a commercial building. It's main tenant (still unannounced) will have 1,100 "knowledge based" employees working a 24/7 schedule (a TV broadcaster?). I believe they indicated the entire site will eventually employ 8,000. There's a restaurant / bar on the south west corner and other shops along the southern public walkway.

The building essentially comprises a series of horizontal terraces, the top most set back on the lakeside elevation. They somehow likened it to a ship. Compared to the sailboat in their Toronto Island POV watercolour rendering, this building is a tanker in more ways than one. They'd love us to love their "iconic lighthouse", a.k.a. a phallic shaped illuminated energy waster, 35 meter(?) high vertical plastic tube projecting off the south-west corner of the building. As you come down Jarvis Street to Queen's Quay, in Mr. Diamond's vision, you'll be enthralled by the grandeur of the cranes of newly purchased American Sugar Refining Inc. ($300 million) offloading raw sugar on the right, and the "iconic lighthouse" on your left. Oh Toronto.... such a typical contrivance, such a "world class city" wannabe.

On plan, the lot that was MT-28, plus the parking lot and charter boat operations to the west, is divided by two north-south streets. Sherbourne Park is a relatively narrow strip on the east third, running from the lake to Queen's Quay like a linear rural land grant of centuries past. Project Symphony occupies the southern half of the west third. There is a 19 meter band of public space along the lakeside. There is a sixty meter wide band of public space on the west side, along the Jarvis St. slip, facing American Sugar, and not the lake (!). A laser pointer was used to indicate that the prevailing winds are from the North-West, sweeping past American Sugar and the public area before hitting Project Symphony. The point of that was lost on me for the moment.

Those North-West prevailing winds will surely coat the public space with raw sugar dust from American Sugar. That area always gets dusted when conditions are right. The windows on the west side will be sugar coated, and the vermin will be pleased to expand their territory from American Sugar into Project Symphony. No wonder the 60 meter wide public space is to be used as a buffer between the sugar factory and the new building. The iconic lighthouse will glisten in the sunlight, sugar coated.

Excavation for the parking garage under the building is to begin in July, but of course this will be a slow process due to archeological requirements, but one could assume TEDCO will get around that one too, if pressed for time.

We've lost a precious film studio from our roster, but we have gained the gentrification of our fractured waterfront. A young lady made a point of photographing everyone at the meeting. Who is she working for? One poor fellow who's gone to every meeting since day one realized he'd been duped. He'd been assurred that what he saw tonite was not what he would see tonite. The meeting facilitator took pains to explain that we should all express our concerns and suggestions constructively, and share our thoughts in writing for a later review by Mr. Diamond and TEDCO. I'd guess it's safe to assume they'll do as they please, and in time, we'll all feel duped.

I still feel nauseous. We lost 20% of Toronto's film business to this municipally extruded lake pickle.

Taller, Better

March 29th, 2007, 06:47 PM

^^ Who is this nauseous person you are quoting?

urban 2.0

March 30th, 2007, 12:04 AM

^^ Who is this nauseous person you are quoting?

Someone from this site:
http://bluecaller.org/showthread.php...ted=1#post4205

kettal

March 30th, 2007, 02:03 AM

I take it he's a union actor, making such a big deal out of this.

InTheBeach

March 30th, 2007, 03:32 AM

Excavation for the parking garage under the building is to begin in July, but of course this will be a slow process due to archeological requirements, but one could assume TEDCO will get around that one too, if pressed for time.

Can someone help me understand when reclaimed land would have archeological requirements?

The whole place is infill.

Metro Gnome

March 30th, 2007, 04:25 AM

Can someone help me understand when reclaimed land would have archeological requirements?

The whole place is infill.

Every dig these days has to meet certain archeological guidelines, infill or not. Remember the intact Fort York wharf discovered when they excavated the condo at the north west corner of Bathurst and Lakeshore a year or so ago? That was infill. It ain't named Lakeshore for nothing. Everything south to the lake is infill, and as you go east, it's infill well north of Lakeshore.

A few of you people seem pretty smug about the politics of the Toronto film business as it relates to Project Symphony and FilmPort Studios in the portlands. Do yourselves a favour, come down from your ivory towers and spend a little time reading about it on that other forum. There are a lot film people who are every bit as educated and clever as you, who find themselves bankrupt after years in the film business, because of the questionable dealings of City Hall and TEDCO. Destroying potent Cinespace MT 28 Studios to accomodate flacid Project Symphony is just the tip of the iceberg. If you spend the time to understand this mess, you'll better understand the compromised politics of Mayor Miller's City Hall which may at some point impact your careers too.

valantino

March 30th, 2007, 05:25 AM

"Destroying potent Cinespace MT 28 Studios to accomodate flacid Project Symphony is just the tip of the iceberg. "

no predisposition here

you already receive tax subsidies and now you want rent subsidies as well as protection from landlords wanting to re-invest in their crumbling properties? I can understand a struggling self employed artist trying to make a living but not an industry worth billions - perhaps downtown Toronto is just the wrong place

Metro Gnome

March 30th, 2007, 07:53 AM

you already receive tax subsidies and now you want rent subsidies as well as protection from landlords wanting to re-invest in their crumbling properties? I can understand a struggling self employed artist trying to make a living but not an industry worth billions - perhaps downtown Toronto is just the wrong place

Tax subsidies are part of the competitive structure of this business. Most global film production venues use subsidies to competitively attract film productions because of the benefits of, in Toronto's case, having a billion dollars spun into so many levels of the local economy. The return on those subsidies is immense.

Project Symphony does not yet have a signed tenant, and as such, is not yet viable. However, TEDCO, in its wisdom, gave their previous tenant, Cinespace Studios short notice to vacate. Cinespace knew they would vacate at some point, but not on short notice. This has had a devastating impact on the Toronto film industry.

The film industry is a loose association of thousands of independent contractors, be they actors, technicians, suppliers, etc. City Hall and TEDCO have successfully destabilized and maybe even destroyed this delicate infrastructure through their secretive agendas. They have victimized upwards of 30,000 film industry dependent people.

The entire billion dollar film industry is now perceived by Hollywood producers as being a destablized business environment. We have lost 20% of our studio capacity with the loss of MT 28 to Project Symphony. Our studio sits vacant behind TEDCO's locked gates and the entire industry is collapsing while Jack Diamond paints water colour renderings of its supposed replacement. City Hall will find that same billion dollars through increased taxes. City Hall wants one token remnant of the film industry to operate as FlmPort, and for the rest of it to disappear entirely or move elsewhere.

For the present, the area south of Eastern Ave. is a viable film district, especially if all studio owners are treated and taxed equally by City Hall, which they are not. Remember, only one of them (TFS / FilmPort) reaps the benefits of sleeping with City Hall. However, you may eventually be correct in stating that downtown Toronto is not the right place for film studios. Land prices and zoning variances will eventually dictate that. Chances are, in twenty years, if it doesn't dissolve completely, it will move to Hamilton, Oshawa, Vaughan, etc., but for now, it's not about to leave the Film District without a struggle.

Taller, Better

March 30th, 2007, 07:55 AM

I talked to the guys who have made films there, and they said it will be relocated in time for the next movie. They didn't seem concerned. Businesses relocate all the time. I am not sure that a Union website (bluecollar or otherwise) could be entirely unbiased, Could explain why the guy was chronically nauseous. I have an EXTREMELY difficult time imagining FilmPort will be bad for local film industry, and I suspect rivals in the industry might be unhappy because of the competition. It is true that Filmport should not get unfair advantages though.. there should be an equal footing.

Steeltown

March 30th, 2007, 03:00 PM

Metro Gnome

March 30th, 2007, 04:20 PM

Yesterday on the news it mentioned that Hamilton City Hall is currently under discussion with a film company to build a film studio in Hamilton.

Was that on CHCH? I missed it.

Taller, Better

March 30th, 2007, 07:16 PM

Yesterday on the news it mentioned that Hamilton City Hall is currently under discussion with a film company to build a film studio in Hamilton. Apparently some want to back out of Toronto and go somewhere cheaper, that's Hamilton.

On top of being cheaper you also get extra tax credit filming outside of the GTA.

More power to them if they can swing it! Lord knows there are enough films in the world to go
around to Hamilton, too. But FilmPort will have an advantage that no other studio here has ever had..
it will have a HUGE soundstage big enough to make the REALLY big extravaganzas like James Bond films... in the past Toronto has been bypassed because it does not have a big enough studio... so, I am unsure how FilmPort can be bad for Toronto.

Steeltown

March 30th, 2007, 07:35 PM

Was that on CHCH? I missed it.

Yea it was on CH.

Orginally before Filmport a company converted a big warehouse (500,000-square-foot) into Hamilton Film Studios, $30 million. At the time it was the largest sound studio. But soon they closed and went to Filmport. So really Hamilton has a big empty film studio already.

Metro Gnome

March 30th, 2007, 08:12 PM

More power to them if they can swing it! Lord knows there are enough films in the world to go
around to Hamilton, too. But FilmPort will have an advantage that no other studio here has ever had..
it will have a HUGE soundstage big enough to make the REALLY big extravaganzas like James Bond films... in the past Toronto has been bypassed because it does not have a big enough studio... so, I am unsure how FilmPort can be bad for Toronto.

My friend, if you take the time to read through that entire bluecaller thread from the beginning, and open every link along the way, you will see why FilmPort is a mixed blessing for the Toronto film industry. If, as of today, it was a complete and fully functioning film production complex, commited for the full duration of its lease as a film production complex, it would be fantastic for Toronto. Sadly, it is none of these. If you visit http://www.FilmPort.ca, click on the top right quadrant, go to Progress then Webcam, you will see a live feed of an existing unrelated building in the foreground and other structures in the background. In between is FilmPort, which currently comprises piles of remediated soil, and assorted steel pilings sticking out of the ground. This represents work that TEDCO has done gratis ($10 million) for the developer who is building the studios, and is all there is to show at this time. Clearly FilmPort does not fill the void left by the loss of Cinespace MT28 studios (aka Project Symphony).

Aside from its one very large studio, FilmPort will not be exceptional in global terms, and the studios it is replacing (TFS - Toronto Film Studios on Eastern Ave.) will be demolished for a WalMart when FilmPort comes on-line in two years. Until completion, Toronto will have less studio space than it had last year. Upon completion, it will have slightly more than last year.

For comparison, here are links to some existing world class studio complexes.

http://www.foxstudiosaustralia.com/page.asp?e_page=618200&section=

http://www.paramountstudios.com/

http://www.filmmakersdestination.com/stages/

http://www.pinewoodgroup.com/gen/default_film_production.aspx

http://www.barrandov.com/en/stages-backlot

http://www.foxbaja.com/

Taller, Better

March 30th, 2007, 09:39 PM

"Aside from its one very large studio, FilmPort will not be exceptional in global terms, and the studios it is replacing (TFS - Toronto Film Studios on Eastern Ave.) will be demolished for a WalMart when FilmPort comes on-line in two years. Until completion, Toronto will have less studio space than it had last year. Upon completion, it will have slightly more than last year".

I think your first sentence glazes over an important point. The big stage IS what Toronto needs, so you can't just sweep it aside as not being exceptional, it is. It will be big enough to build a full scale model of the Parthenon. I'd say that is exceptional, wouldn't you? That is getting into the territory of Pinewoods in England, and that stage will allow for mega films that cannot be filmed in Toronto as it stands. It doesn't all just boil down to combined square footage, and I don't buy your implication that the studio is not important because it is not the biggest in the world. Smoke and mirrors on your part.
Isn't Cinespace being rebuilt elsewhere, and if not, why? I had heard from people in the industry that they were being relocated.
Just out of curiosity, what is your connection to the industry? Did you write the Bluecallar article you are quoting?

"and is all there is to show at this time. Clearly FilmPort does not fill the void left by the loss of Cinespace MT28 studios"

???? Well, yeah!.. construction has just started! I doubt if anyone on earth expected it to be completed by now. That is sort of like saying the new Four Seasons is a big failure because all there is is rubble on the construction site.

valantino

March 30th, 2007, 09:41 PM

Project Symphony does not yet have a signed tenant, and as such, is not yet viable. However, TEDCO, in its wisdom, gave their previous tenant, Cinespace Studios short notice to vacate.

unless you have some inside information, every public release says they have a tenant lined up (actually signing will probably depend on development and building permits among other things)

The film industry is a loose association of thousands of independent contractors, be they actors, technicians, suppliers, etc. City Hall and TEDCO have successfully destabilized and maybe even destroyed this delicate infrastructure through their secretive agendas. They have victimized upwards of 30,000 film industry dependent people.

Please explain how TEDCO & City Hall has destabilized the industry. If anything, it is the film industry being too dependent on handouts yet too pompous and arrogant to work together that has destablized the market. The Hearn continues to sit unfinished; a full five years after the (sweet) lease with OPG was signed . And, the lease condition between the TEDCO and Filmport was set by the various film studios bidding for the contract.

P.S. The development schedule for the East Bayfront has been in place for several years now so I don't quite understand how the eviction by TEDCO of Cinespace could be that much of a surprise to them

Metro Gnome

March 31st, 2007, 12:40 AM

I talked to the guys who have made films there, and they said it will be relocated in time for the next movie. They didn't seem concerned....

Business is down 50%. Those fortunate to be in the working 50% are less aware or concerned yet with the politics that are causing the decline. You must have been speaking with one of those "guys".

...But FilmPort will have an advantage that no other studio here has ever had..
it will have a HUGE soundstage big enough to make the REALLY big extravaganzas like James Bond films... in the past Toronto has been bypassed because it does not have a big enough studio... so, I am unsure how FilmPort can be bad for Toronto.

That one stage will be a huge bonus, but one sound stage does not make an industry. BTW, it's only marginally bigger than other existing stages elsewhere. The industry needs many medium sized stages to sustain itself.

Yea it was on CH.

Orginally before Filmport a company converted a big warehouse (500,000-square-foot) into Hamilton Film Studios, $30 million. At the time it was the largest sound studio. But soon they closed and went to Filmport. So really Hamilton has a big empty film studio already.

Thanks about the CH newscast.

That "studio" only lasted a few months. The investors didn't do their homework and revamped a building with numerous support columns in each studio. Film studios are free-span structures. Error. They quickly went under. These investors had nothing to do with the land baron who is about to build FilmPort (we're still hoping he does).

... It doesn't all just boil down to combined square footage, and I don't buy your implication that the studio is not important because it is not the biggest in the world. Smoke and mirrors on your part.

For a sustainable industry, it actually DOES boil down to square footage.

Isn't Cinespace being rebuilt elsewhere, and if not, why? I had heard from people in the industry that they were being relocated.
Just out of curiosity, what is your connection to the industry? Did you write the Bluecallar article you are quoting?

Cinespace still has other studios, but losing 140,000 sq ft was a hit to them and the industry. They are not relocating at this time as their eviction on short notice caught them off guard.

I've worked in the industry for decades. I didn't write the article, but agree with it.

"and is all there is to show at this time. Clearly FilmPort does not fill the void left by the loss of Cinespace MT28 studios"

???? Well, yeah!.. construction has just started! I doubt if anyone on earth expected it to be completed by now. That is sort of like saying the new Four Seasons is a big failure because all there is is rubble on the construction site.

Point being that City Hall and TEDCO disrespected the film industry by removing 20% of our studio capacity for Project Symphony, which is still at the watercolour rendering stage and without a signed tenant. They are aware that FilmPort is still just steel footings driven to bedrock.

unless you have some inside information, every public release says they have a tenant lined up (actually signing will probably depend on development and building permits among other things)

I was at the meeting as was a reporter. He reported this: "Mr. Steiner also said that City Council directed TEDCO to go find a commercial tenant for the waterfront site, and, he said, the tenant (with whom he is now negotiating) apparently approached him about the site." That's what I heard too. "Lined up" and signed up aren't quite the same, are they?

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/toronto/story.html?id=f8418d57-0a4f-4ba8-9310-f92ca9e667ec

Please explain how TEDCO & City Hall has destabilized the industry. If anything, it is the film industry being too dependent on handouts yet too pompous and arrogant to work together that has destablized the market.

If you're truly interested in how TEDCO and City Hall have destabilized the industry, please read through that other forum. Any attempts to stereotype the industry without fully understanding its complexities will only backfire on you. The industry's studios, suppliers, unions, etc. do work together as much as possible to make Toronto viable global competition, but it's a tough go without the municipality being onside.

The Hearn continues to sit unfinished; a full five years after the (sweet) lease with OPG was signed .

The Hearn is destined for other useage, including a new hydro generation plant. Check the news on that one.

And, the lease condition between the TEDCO and Filmport was set by the various film studios bidding for the contract. [/QUOTE}

It was a corrupt process in which the second most viable offering was accepted by City Hall / TEDCO, who two months later went back to the more viable group and asked them to please buy out the "winning" bidder, who did not have the finances to build FilmPort. Please read that other bluecaller forum yourself if you are truly interested in the genesis of this municipal scandal. I'm just rehashing stuff that's written there. Go here too.
http://www.whatswrongtoronto.com/

[QUOTE]P.S. The development schedule for the East Bayfront has been in place for several years now so I don't quite understand how the eviction by TEDCO of Cinespace could be that much of a surprise to them

A vague concept of the East Bayfront redevelopment has been talked of for many, many years. Cinespace was fully aware that they would have to leave sometime, but not on two month's notice. "Development schedule?" Please do publish the schedule and completion dates for Project Symphony right here on this thread. That'll be a news scoop.

Thanks all of you for your interest. I'm going back to bluecaller.org. See you there if you're interested in getting to the bottom of this.

urban 2.0

March 31st, 2007, 03:34 AM

Business is down 50%. Those fortunate to be in the working 50% are less aware or concerned yet with the politics that are causing the decline. You must have been speaking with one of those "guys".

That one stage will be a huge bonus, but one sound stage does not make an industry. BTW, it's only marginally bigger than other existing stages elsewhere. The industry needs many medium sized stages to sustain itself.

Thanks about the CH newscast.

That "studio" only lasted a few months. The investors didn't do their homework and revamped a building with numerous support columns in each studio. Film studios are free-span structures. Error. They quickly went under. These investors had nothing to do with the land baron who is about to build FilmPort (we're still hoping he does).

For a sustainable industry, it actually DOES boil down to square footage.

Cinespace still has other studios, but losing 140,000 sq ft was a hit to them and the industry. They are not relocating at this time as their eviction on short notice caught them off guard.

I've worked in the industry for decades. I didn't write the article, but agree with it.

Point being that City Hall and TEDCO disrespected the film industry by removing 20% of our studio capacity for Project Symphony, which is still at the watercolour rendering stage and without a signed tenant. They are aware that FilmPort is still just steel footings driven to bedrock.

I was at the meeting as was a reporter. He reported this: "Mr. Steiner also said that City Council directed TEDCO to go find a commercial tenant for the waterfront site, and, he said, the tenant (with whom he is now negotiating) apparently approached him about the site." That's what I heard too. "Lined up" and signed up aren't quite the same, are they?

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/toronto/story.html?id=f8418d57-0a4f-4ba8-9310-f92ca9e667ec

If you're truly interested in how TEDCO and City Hall have destabilized the industry, please read through that other forum. Any attempts to stereotype the industry without fully understanding its complexities will only backfire on you. The industry's studios, suppliers, unions, etc. do work together as much as possible to make Toronto viable global competition, but it's a tough go without the municipality being onside.

The Hearn is destined for other useage, including a new hydro generation plant. Check the news on that one.

[QUOTE]And, the lease condition between the TEDCO and Filmport was set by the various film studios bidding for the contract. [/QUOTE}

It was a corrupt process in which the second most viable offering was accepted by City Hall / TEDCO, who two months later went back to the more viable group and asked them to please buy out the "winning" bidder, who did not have the finances to build FilmPort. Please read that other bluecaller forum yourself if you are truly interested in the genesis of this municipal scandal. I'm just rehashing stuff that's written there. Go here too.
http://www.whatswrongtoronto.com/

A vague concept of the East Bayfront redevelopment has been talked of for many, many years. Cinespace was fully aware that they would have to leave sometime, but not on two month's notice. "Development schedule?" Please do publish the schedule and completion dates for Project Symphony right here on this thread. That'll be a news scoop.

Thanks all of you for your interest. I'm going back to bluecaller.org. See you there if you're interested in getting to the bottom of this.

... remember the dollar has surged ahead - Toronto was always chosen not because of the people working here - but rather because it was cheaper here then the US. Why would a Hollywood production come to Canada to save 10% off production cost?

Dino Domingo

March 31st, 2007, 04:26 AM

Who is Metro Gnome? What is with all this negativity? Man, are you a buzz kill.

phunky

March 31st, 2007, 05:10 AM

I'm sure he's a Union person who is just pissed off about something.

As for Filmport. There are different phases. When it is FULLY 100% complete it will be MUCH larger than what we have now.
At the end of phase 1 it will only be slightly larger than what we have now. But phase 1 isn't that big compared to the whole development.

kettal

March 31st, 2007, 06:36 AM

I think the actors strike probably had something to do with the 'destabilization' too :lol:

Taller, Better

March 31st, 2007, 07:13 AM

Business is down for a multitude of very well known reasons. Anyone in the business knows the many factors that have been at work in reducing the number of American films being shot here. Filmport may have affected Metro Gnome negatively, but he is making it sound like it is bad for the entire industry. All sympathy in the world for the Gnome, but this situation reminds me very much of 21 years ago when I moved here, and big ticket musicals like Phantom of the Opera were just starting to set up here for long engagements, instead of just being short touring shows with mostly American actors. The local small theatre folk screamed bloody murder that it would be the end of theatre in this town and fought tooth and nail against big shows. In the end, everyone benefitted and it just increased the activity of live theatre in this city. It is all part of the city growing, and yes there are going to be some people and businesses displaced in the short term but we have to keep an eye on the long term.

"That one stage will be a huge bonus, but one sound stage does not make an industry. BTW, it's only marginally bigger than other existing stages elsewhere"

Yeah, elsewhere in the world, but not elsewhere in Toronto, or elsewhere in Canada. Again, for your own purposes you are trying to minimize the importance of this stage by airily saying it is not much bigger than some other locations in the world. I imagine even you know how weak your argument is in this respect.

"Cinespace still has other studios, but losing 140,000 sq ft was a hit to them and the industry. They are not relocating at this time as their eviction on short notice caught them off guard".

Cinespace is not throwing their hands up in the air and quitting because of this eviction, and you know it. They are part of a big ongoing film project and they will move to new locations. Like it has been pointed out before, the schedule for this has been long known. I think you are just massaging all this to make it sound like there will be no medium sized stages left.

urban 2.0

March 31st, 2007, 07:16 AM

Sure business is down 50%. But only a fool would blame that on Filmport. Anyone in the business knows the many factors that have been at work in reducing the number of American films being shot here. To me Metro Gnome has made his profile just to come in here and drop his own very user-specific viewpoint on this issue. He is not looking at the big picture, as he claims; he seems to have been personally negatively affected by Filmport, thus the project is not good for Toronto. All sympathy in the world for the Gnome, but I do not buy his arguments against this project. It reminds me very much of 21 years ago when I moved here, and big ticket musicals like Phantom of the Opera were just starting to set up here for long engagements, instead of just being short touring shows with mostly American actors. The local small theatre folk screamed bloody murder that it would be the end of theatre in this town and fought tooth and nail against big shows. In the end, everyone benefitted and it just increased the activity of live theatre in this city. It is all part of the city growing, and yes there are going to be some people and businesses displaced in the short term but we have to keep an eye on the long term.

"Cinespace still has other studios, but losing 140,000 sq ft was a hit to them and the industry. They are not relocating at this time as their eviction on short notice caught them off guard".

Cinespace is not throwing their hands up in the air and quitting because of this eviction, and you know it. They are part of a big ongoing film project and they will move to new locations. Like it has been pointed out before, the schedule for this has been long known. I think you are just massaging all this to make it sound like there will be no medium sized stages left by conveniently juggling facts and figures.

... these unions also killed Blue Man Group.

I'm all in favour of Unions - but only if the employer treats it's employees like shit. Just because you start a theatre company in Toronto shouldn't mean by default that you need to be unionized. Obviously if the employer doesn't offer competitive rates - the employees should organize.

Taller, Better

March 31st, 2007, 07:26 AM

Of course there will be growing pains for the industry in Toronto, but people are doing something to try and vault Toronto into the big leagues for film making. There will be people fighting against change, as there always is. I feel sorry for people whose apple carts get upset by the change, but hopefully in the long run it will eventually be better for them, too. Filmport is a fait accompli ;fighting against it is pointless, as it is going ahead.

urban 2.0

March 31st, 2007, 11:43 AM

Thanks all of you for your interest. I'm going back to bluecaller.org. See you there if you're interested in getting to the bottom of this.

... why cause everyone there sees the world through your eyes? Coward.

Nothing worse then people that all agree with you. Put your head back in the sand. We'll act as the real world here.

Metro Gnome

March 31st, 2007, 02:57 PM

... why cause everyone there sees the world through your eyes? Coward.

Nothing worse then people that all agree with you. Put your head back in the sand. We'll act as the real world here.

Coward? Really. Now you can say it to my face rather than my back. Pity you feel compelled to attack me personally rather than disprove my assertions, a basic flaw in your "real world" logic my friend.

kettal

April 1st, 2007, 08:49 PM

I wonder if the future mystery-tennant realizes that this location will have virtually no road access?

valantino

April 3rd, 2007, 02:33 AM

but it's a tough go without the municipality being onside.

LOL

The Hearn is destined for other useage, including a new hydro generation plant. Check the news on that one.

LOL

http://www.opg.com/pdf/TownhallBurpeeMay_06.pdf

A vague concept of the East Bayfront redevelopment has been talked of for many, many years.

define what vague means to you

http://www.towaterfront.ca/dynamic.php?first=43fa75b221b08&second=43fa7f3cddad8&third=442c38f6aa681

Point being that City Hall and TEDCO disrespected the film industry by removing 20% of our studio capacity for Project Symphony, which is still at the watercolour rendering stage and without a signed tenant. They are aware that FilmPort is still just steel footings driven to bedrock.

You're absolutely unbelieveable - THEY HAVE A TENANT and are waiting for permits to start construction. You're basically saying here the tenants occupying the now demolished buildings should have being protected and Bay Adelaide prevented with only a rendering and word of a tenant released to the public

go get a clue instead of spewing garbage from some malcontent's message board

Metro Gnome

April 3rd, 2007, 05:37 AM

Quote: "but it's a tough go without the municipality being onside."

LOL

Quote: "The Hearn is destined for other useage, including a new hydro generation plant. Check the news on that one."

LOL http://www.opg.com/pdf/TownhallBurpeeMay_06.pdf

I can assure you, there is no film studio being built at the Hearn. Go take a look. It's all talk. Don't believe everything you read.

Quote: "A vague concept of the East Bayfront redevelopment has been talked of for many, many years."

define what vague means to you http://www.towaterfront.ca/dynamic.p...=442c38f6aa681

This is a dead link my friend.

Quote: "Point being that City Hall and TEDCO disrespected the film industry by removing 20% of our studio capacity for Project Symphony, which is still at the watercolour rendering stage and without a signed tenant. They are aware that FilmPort is still just steel footings driven to bedrock."

You're absolutely unbelieveable - THEY HAVE A TENANT and are waiting for permits to start construction. You're basically saying here the tenants occupying the now demolished buildings should have being protected and Bay Adelaide prevented with only a rendering and word of a tenant released to the public

go get a clue instead of spewing garbage from some malcontent's message board
_______________

Your Quote: "THEY HAVE A TENANT"

Please, if you know who the signed, legally committed, mystery tenant is, phone every newspaper in Toronto, because you have a scoop of immense poltical import. I'll be watching the media for your revelation. It's 23:30 April 2/07 right now. I guess we'll know tomorrow who it is. Oh, thank you so much Valantino / cowboy, you really rock!

Metro Gnome

April 3rd, 2007, 01:35 PM

Quote: "A vague concept of the East Bayfront redevelopment has been talked of for many, many years."

define what vague means to you http://www.towaterfront.ca/dynamic.p...=442c38f6aa681

This is a dead link my friend.

You should have linked to the TWRC site's "NEWS" page. There is nothing specific from the TWRC concerning Project Symphony (it's vague, and out of date news). http://www.towaterfront.ca/dynamic.php?first=43fa760a72412&second=44301f3cb69d5

Perhaps you've forgotten that this has become a TEDCO, not a TWRC controlled "project". I quote from the National Post article on the meeting.

"As the meeting began, Andrew Gray, vice-president of East Bayfront Development at the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp., told the assembled, "I'm going to turn it over to TEDCO, because really this is their show tonight." No kidding.

When the city, province and federal government created TWRC to develop the waterfront, the public was given assurances of involvement in the planning process. TEDCO, the city agency that owns most of the port land, showed again last night that it has another model: it works behind closed doors.

Jeff Steiner, the president of TEDCO, did confirm that he hired Diamond and Schmitt to design the building, without a tender."

And from the March 31st National Post:

"And while the TWRC has run lots of design competitions and drawn up pretty plans, it can boast of few tangible achievements to date. Meanwhile, a sibling agency, the Toronto Economic Development Corp. (TEDCO), is doing its own thing at the waterfront, barrelling ahead with its plans and disregarding the TWRC's mandate to involve the public in retooling the lakeshore. (On Tuesday, TEDCO refused to reveal the prospective principal tenant for Project Symphony, a proposed 10-storey office building on Queens Quay.)"

http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/artslife/torontomag/story.html?id=75a5f66a-3c27-46b1-972f-2baa7e77c3fc

If the TWRC was actually in control, I'd be a lot more enthused. I guess you're a TEDCO fan, but then why do you link to the TWRC site? You can be sure that if TEDCO actually had a tenant for Project Symphony, that they'd reveal it. Chances are, with the poor building design and the negative publicity, if TEDCO ever had a tenant, it's likely having serious thoughts about becoming the focus of a public scandal.

valantino

April 3rd, 2007, 04:42 PM

There is nothing specific from the TWRC concerning Project Symphony

ummm I was quoting you ...the East Bayfront encompasses more than Project Symphony

Jeff Steiner, the president of TEDCO, did confirm that he hired Diamond and Schmitt to design the building, without a tender

and what so different about that compared to most other commercial development

And while the TWRC has run lots of design competitions and drawn up pretty plans, it can boast of few tangible achievements to date.

whoa .. now you're quoting the national post. The TWRC has so far accomplished more than anyone could of ever expected in a very short timeframe with a half dozen projects under construction and several others already completed

If the TWRC was actually in control, I'd be a lot more enthused. I guess you're a TEDCO fan, but then why do you link to the TWRC site?

because the TWRC is in control of the East Bayfront redevelopment no matter if TEDCO manages most of the property

valantino

April 3rd, 2007, 08:36 PM

the two agencies share different agendas. TEDCO is there to manage city owned land while TWRC is there to create a comprehensive waterfront plan and implement it. (When have planners and developer ever gotten along ) And if you're wondering about the timing of TEDCO's announcement, the city put a hold on development on all lands under TWRC jurisdiction while the waterfront plan and design review panel were being created .

kettal

April 5th, 2007, 07:44 AM

I guess from the fact that National Post hates this project, the tenant is probably not Canwest...

InTheBeach

April 5th, 2007, 02:07 PM

Put your head back in the sand. We'll act as the real world here.

:lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol: :lol:

Like, whatever.

Waterloo_Guy

April 11th, 2007, 10:30 PM

I hate this.

1. Wrong place for office space
2. Waste of the waterfront
3. A design that wouldn't fly in Mississauga
4. A developer who builds industrial space

thryve

April 11th, 2007, 11:02 PM

Is the final building going to look different from what we've seen? (Haven't they switched to Jack Diamond now?)

I don't mean to ask this if it's already been used before, but I am just a little confused.

kettal

April 11th, 2007, 11:48 PM

but I am just a little confused.

Just a little? The whole damn thing is covered in secrecy. It's disgusting.

Waterloo_Guy

April 12th, 2007, 12:55 AM

The whole damn thing is covered in secrecy.

Is it any wonder why?

kettal

April 12th, 2007, 01:00 AM

because it's too important for us poor stupid citizens to understand.

Waterloo_Guy

April 12th, 2007, 01:03 AM

Well that makes sense. Actually, I would prefer to be in the dark on this one. Ignorance is bliss.

valantino

April 12th, 2007, 03:49 AM

Waterloo_Guy

April 12th, 2007, 03:55 AM

1. Wrong place for office space

what ... want another cityplace or under utilized green space

2. Waste of the waterfront

a mix of uses is never a waste

3. A design that wouldn't fly in Mississauga

lol ... unfortunately this would be a landmark development in the 905

4. A developer who builds industrial space

why does that matter

1. Cityplace? That makes no sense. Come on, this is not where half a million square feet of office space should go. It belongs in a conventional downtown tower that looks awesome on a postcard.

2. Mixed use is fine, but it IS a waste if it looks like this. This development is disappointing.

4. The developer? Well, I'm just concerned is all. Am I the only one?

phunky

April 12th, 2007, 04:51 AM

3. A design that wouldn't fly in Mississauga

lol ... unfortunately this would be a landmark development in the 905

You obviously know nothing about the 905. Don't forget we had an INTERNATIONAL design competition for Absolute World. That is a landmark that people from all over the world will be coming to see, just like they did for the CN Tower.

Waterloo_Guy

April 12th, 2007, 05:04 AM

Exactly. The 905 is getting some good stuff. It still has the old stigma, but that is bound to change with more solid developments.

taal

April 12th, 2007, 05:38 AM

Why is there this constant comparison - your honestly comparing apples to oranges .. heck I thinking calling them both fruits is pushing it.

What works in 905 .. or I take it you meant Mississauga .. doesn't necessary work in .. 416 .. or vice versa. Someone wanting to live in MCC has to have a very different mentality then someone who wants to live in say downtown Toronto. And there's nothing wrong with that - it would be a shame if there was only development in one of those areas but that’s clearly not the case..

Anyways this wasn't directed at the comment below directly its just the whole general idea ... sory for the rant.
You obviously know nothing about the 905. Don't forget we had an INTERNATIONAL design competition for Absolute World. That is a landmark that people from all over the world will be coming to see, just like they did for the CN Tower.

KGB

April 12th, 2007, 07:49 AM

Mixed use is fine, but it IS a waste if it looks like this. This development is disappointing.

Gotta agree with this attitude. If Toronto wants to get any milage out of its new waterfront redevelopment, it should place some importance on making it a place for "showplace" buildings....nothing here will go un-noticed...too visable, both physically and politically. The city now has these new powers to regulate stuff like this, and this is the best place to start exercising it.

You obviously know nothing about the 905. Don't forget we had an INTERNATIONAL design competition for Absolute World.

Well, Absolute is a winner, but that's still just ONE project...hardly changes the nature of the city.

That is a landmark that people from all over the world will be coming to see, just like they did for the CN Tower.

Now you're pushing it.

KGB

catcher_of_cats

April 12th, 2007, 02:28 PM

Architects slug it out over 'Symphony' design
Peter Kuitenbrouwer, National Post
Published: Thursday, April 12, 2007

The waterfront's design review panel is a big step forward in city-building. And as theatrics, it can be showstopping -- as it was yesterday, when architect Jack Diamond lost his cool.

Nine architects and planners gathered to scrutinize the Diamond and Schmitt Architects building for the Toronto Economic Development Corp., on Queens Quay next to the Redpath sugar refinery.

The panel was, it's fair to say, underwhelmed by the "Project Symphony" building, which resembles two shoe boxes with an upright empty paper tower roll plunked beside them.

(The project has a tenant, which TEDCO won't reveal; we learned yesterday that it is a "media company.")

Completing his presentation, Mr. Diamond asked, "No applause?" No. No applause.

"I've used the term before, I'll use it again: I don't think it's orgasmic," said Paul Bedford, the former chief planner of Toronto.

"Are there strategies to make the building more bold?" asked Tania Bortolotto, an architect.

"One of the strengths of Mr. Diamond's work is that it's very modest," said Peter Clewes, another architect.

"I get concerned, Jack, whether you really believe in engaging the public realm in your buildings," said Janet Rosenberg, a landscape architect.

The harshest words came from Siamak Hariri, an architect known for designing the Schulich School of Business at York University.

"Do we want to see something special on this site, or is this just another site?" Mr. Hariri asked. "Do we want something that we might consider would have magic, that would take our breath away? Or dare we say it, that the world might notice?"

(Certainly, the location, next to the Jarvis Street slip, is a spectacular one; this week the Puffin, a huge green sugar ship, bobbed there at anchor, having unloaded its cargo into Redpath's raw sugar shed.)

"I wish that it went much further," Mr. Hariri continued. "That it cantilevered on the water. We should raise the bar higher."

Then Mr. Diamond got up, returned to the podium, and got mad.

"I'll tell you where I take exception," he said. "There is a philosophical difference." Then, addressing Mr. Hariri directly: "We could not be more diametrically opposed. You do not take a shape and cram a use into it. The idea to get something cantilevered: that speaks to me of provincial insecurity.

"I couldn't disagree with you more, Siamak. You do your buildings your way, I'll do my buildings my way, and we'll see in history which ones last the test of time."

Yowza. You'd think Mr. Diamond, after building projects all over the world, would be a little more thick skinned.

Still, in the end, Bruce Kuwabara, who heads this design review panel, sought to paper over the differences and keep the project moving forward. He summed up the panel's comments as approval for the direction of Project Symphony, while suggesting that they keep working on it and come back again with a more complete scheme.

Afterward, a reporter buttonholed Mr. Kuwabara as the starving architect wolfed down a couple of chocolate chip cookies.

"But Bruce -- do you love it?" the reporter asked, apparently referring to Mr. Diamond's building, not the cookies.

"Love is too strong a word," Mr. Kuwabara replied. "The panel wants to be seen as encouraging of Jack Diamond. I'm a Buddhist. Better to travel hopefully than never to arrive."

"When you're Japanese you can never say no," he added. "You have to have a degree of empathy for the proponent."

One problem here, he conceded, is TEDCO's decision to award the project to Mr. Diamond, rather than hold an architectural competition, which, he said, would have "set the bar high."

And Mr. Kuwabara added, "If it doesn't continue to get better and better, then I'll be the first one to say so."

Mr. Hariri retorted, "The problem with our city is that there's a kind of polite mediocrity."

Yes, that's often true. Still, watching brand-name architects slug it out in public, in the interest of better architecture is a remarkably refreshing development.

Will it improve the city's built form? It certainly can't hurt.

Pkuitenbrouwer@nationalpost.com

© National Post 2007

valantino

April 12th, 2007, 04:19 PM

. Cityplace? That makes no sense. Come on, this is not where half a million square feet of office space should go. It belongs in a conventional downtown tower that looks awesome on a postcard.

Sorry, but I disagree. I do like the CBD but it should not have exclusive rights to all office space in the downtown core and/or should all office space be built as conventional towers

You obviously know nothing about the 905. Don't forget we had an INTERNATIONAL design competition for Absolute World. That is a landmark that people from all over the world will be coming to see, just like they did for the CN Tower

Sorry for not being clear - I'm refering to commercial space.

P.S. I get the feeling you'll be quite disappointed with the built version of Absolute

I'm not impressed with Project Symphony (or my source for that matter) but Diamond's a competent architect and I'm hopeful the final design will turn out much better than the blurry photos.

Waterloo_Guy

April 12th, 2007, 10:28 PM

Well, That article confirms my fears. This project is absolute crap.

valantino

April 13th, 2007, 12:51 AM

There's a ton of ego in that article though

can't say I care at all for Hariri's suggested statement by cantilevering the project over the water

Waterloo_Guy

April 13th, 2007, 01:59 AM

catcher_of_cats

April 13th, 2007, 03:48 AM

I just really think we should expect a lot more for our waterfront. There isn't much undeveloped space left and it matters how we use it. A cheep design and an over-hyped office park doesn't work for me. It looks like a cash grab by the city.

I have a proposal: no office space. And no condos for that mater. Sound crazy? Imagine a purely public space. There would be a Thai restaurant, a pub, a water fall, green space--kind of like an indoor/outdoor park with just enough retail and services to pay for the thing. A place to hang out, grab a beer, read a book. How nuts is that?

This project is not a cash grab, but it is not any better then one. TEDCO is once again attempting to prove that they are relevant but as usual they are doing things in a half-assed manner. Also, the east waterfront cannot be one massive park with a bit of retail due to one thing: CASH. Imagine the cost of going to a restaurant or grabbing a beer if that is the only thing that is funding a project on one of the most expensive pieces of property in Canada. Public space is much needed along the waterfront but buildings with the proper height and mass bring definition to a public space and well designed buildings enhance everything around them. The idea here is to get the correct mix along the eastern waterfront and it appears that the consensus is that Jack Diamond's and TEDCO's Project Symphony is a complete wash up.

kettal

April 13th, 2007, 04:44 AM

The TWRC proposal was the result of an international competition, and it was put through years of public input. If Symphony gets built, it must conform to the existing plans. Unfortunately it does not, yet gets pushed through anyways.

InTheBeach

April 13th, 2007, 05:35 AM

One good thing about this design is that it is short.

If it was tall and ugly, then we would have some serious trouble.

Let's see how this review process works. Certainly a step in the right direction.

I don't think they are meaning to impose on the design, just raising the the bar.

bigcityboy

April 13th, 2007, 06:17 PM

i agree with hume about this project, but i actually like the opera house. didn't think it was necessary for him to bring it into this fight.

From Today's Star:

Glass boxes don't square with waterfront greatness
Apr 13, 2007 04:30 AM
Christopher Hume

If more proof were needed about why Toronto will never achieve the greatness it craves, it was provided this week by the Waterfront Design Review Panel.

Created by the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp. and chaired by Toronto architect Bruce Kuwabara, its responsibility is to ensure that redevelopment of the city's waterfront meets the highest architectural standards.

Instead of doing that, however, the panel bent over backwards to accommodate a proposal, Project Symphony, that by the body's own admission sets the bar as low as it could get away with.

The scheme, designed by Diamond Schmitt Architects for an unnamed client on publicly owned land at the foot of Jarvis St., would be unremarkable even it were located along, say, Highway 400. But as the first project on a major site on the water's edge, it says loud and clear that it's business as usual in Toronto, that architecture is at best of secondary importance and that the interests of business take precedence over those of the city.

Though most members of the panel made it clear they weren't happy with the design, the group recommended the project proceed, but on the condition that as it progresses, it continues to go before the panel.

Given the architectural ordinariness of the scheme and the secrecy of the process, it will come as no surprise that it's the brainchild of the Toronto Economic Development Corp. and its CEO Jeff Steiner, whose desire to please potential tenants knows no bounds. When details of the contract become public – if they ever do – rest assured the client will have been given a sweetheart deal.

TEDCO, wholly owned by the city, was incorporated in 1986 to develop municipally owned lands and promote job creation.

Architect Jack Diamond clearly understands TEDCO's priorities; he began his presentation yesterday by pointing out that his building will bring 1,100 jobs to the waterfront. Great, but this was the designer talking to a design panel!

No one denies bringing employment to the waterfront is crucial, but at what price?

Diamond's design, which all panel members agreed was much improved after two previous sessions, consists of two glass-clad boxes joined by a glass atrium.

Though there's really nothing wrong with the proposal, the trouble is it's on the waterfront, where the same old, same old won't do.

Located east of the Jarvis St. slip and Redpath Sugar, it would include a "dune"/amphitheatre on the west side as well as a café and an interior space that could be used as a theatre. Other than that, the most accessible part of the project is an underground parking lot that will be open to the public after hours and on weekends.

"The panel wimped out," admitted Toronto architect and panel member Siamak Hariri, who was attacked by the notoriously thin-skinned Diamond during the sometimes stormy session. "We're here to be a design review panel and this is one of the most important projects on the waterfront. I'm not inspired by it."

Kuwabara also made it clear he wasn't excited by the scheme.

"It was a conditional approval," he insisted, "approved on the basis of a process that allows us to review the details. I still have a lot of issues. I always thought there should have been a competition for the first waterfront building. I wish it could be more than it is. It has to be urban, animated and able to capture the public imagination. If it doesn't get better and better, I'll be the first to say so."

But as the old saying goes, you can't turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. All the detailing in the world won't rescue a scheme that in its very form and massing misses the point and potential of the site. For example, the failure to engage the lake or present an interesting facade on any of its sides and its dubious relationship to street level runs all too deep for rehabilitation.

The Diamond Schmitt firm's great strength is its ability to produce fabric buildings that fit in seamlessly with their context. The Regent Park Community Health Centre and the Bahen Centre on St. George St. are examples of the excellence of which the firm is capable. But then there's the Four Seasons Centre for the Performing Arts, which fails as a civic and cultural icon.

Project Symphony is critical because it will establish the context for the waterfront. This proposal is not up to the task.

Let the Diamond Schmitt team do the second, third or fourth buildings on the site – background buildings – but not the first.

And how sad that waterfront revitalization should be compromised almost before it has started by a city agency, TEDCO, acting on behalf of the civic good. We know nothing about how Diamond Schmitt got the commission, the terms of the lease with the secret tenant, or why the project is being rushed through with such unseemly haste.

Pity this city. Then get angry, very angry. The revitalization we need extends well beyond the shores of Lake Ontario.

Christopher Hume can be reached at chume@thestar.ca

Taller, Better

April 13th, 2007, 06:56 PM

Good to see people getting passionate about architecture in this city.

salvius

April 13th, 2007, 07:00 PM

That Hume article is the second one I've agreed with in the very short while. This project is not fitting for this location.

Waterloo_Guy

April 13th, 2007, 11:10 PM

Yup, I'm happy that I'm not the only one pissed off about this thing. With a waterfront location like this, they should build something so great that if you catch a glimpse of it in a movie it's an instant giveaway that it's Toronto.

What's with the rush to develop this spot? I would rather see nothing at all.

outinleftfield

April 13th, 2007, 11:14 PM

TEDCO needs to be reigned in.... in a major way! Maybe THAT is one of the things that eeds to come from this debacle!

kettal

April 14th, 2007, 02:11 AM

So.. the tenant is not Toronto Star, and it's not Global... that only leaves one more possibility.

urban 2.0

April 14th, 2007, 04:16 AM

elliot

April 14th, 2007, 04:25 AM

Please add music with Lucas Rossi vocals:

"It's a bitter... sweet... symphony..."

;-)

CrazyCanuck

April 14th, 2007, 04:32 AM

You could do that, but then you would have to owe the Beatles royalties, hehe.

urban 2.0

April 14th, 2007, 04:34 AM

One problem here, he conceded, is TEDCO's decision to award the project to Mr. Diamond, rather than hold an architectural competition, which, he said, would have "set the bar high."

Mr. Hariri retorted, "The problem with our city is that there's a kind of polite mediocrity."

... no the problem with this city/province/country is nepotism.

elliot

April 14th, 2007, 04:39 AM

Canuck... it's a Toronto forum posting. :)

phunky

April 14th, 2007, 04:53 AM

Wow those pictures are so amazing! I love that bridge!

Dino Domingo

April 14th, 2007, 05:02 AM

:(

WTF man? Why is the city allowing this shit??

InTheBeach

April 15th, 2007, 06:45 AM

:(

WTF man? Why is the city allowing this shit??

This is what happens when people working for the city are more concerned with putting check marks in boxes.

And just think, some of these people want to tear down Yonge St. and start over.

Metro Gnome

April 15th, 2007, 02:05 PM

You cats seen this? http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=juUZ25jMTzE Miller lets it slip re. TEDCO.

And some new stuff here: http://www.bluecaller.org/showthread.php?p=4635#post4635

Taller, Better

April 15th, 2007, 03:26 PM

^^^^You still going on about that? Maybe it is time you just "moved on" in life and let it go.
I love how that union youtube thing you posted claims it was an "independent filmmaker". LOL!

Metro Gnome

April 15th, 2007, 04:16 PM

^^^^You still going on about that? Maybe it is time you just "moved on" in life and let it go.
I love how that union youtube thing you posted claims it was an "independent filmmaker". LOL!

Open you mind boy, and stop bashing me with your brand of elitism. It's one thing to be disappointed with Project Symphony, but it's quite another to allow it without attempting to fully comprehend its genesis. Regardless of the source of the YouTube trailer, it's the content that speaks volumes. Watch it again, and listen this time. Miller & Co. bury themselves in their own words. Project Symphony is a prime example of Miller's elitism manifesting itself as nepotism, which will ensure a low architectural standard on the waterfront. Neither he nor TEDCO are accountable if people like you don't make some noise. You refuse to make the connect between Project Symphony and FilmPort, but you can't possibly fully comprehend one without the other.

Here's more on Project Symphony. http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/LAC.20070414.WATER14/TPStory/Entertainment/columnists

A sinking feeling
On the lake, Globe and Mail architecture critic LISA ROCHON sees a lost opportunity

LISA ROCHON

Of all the words of mice and men,

the saddest are 'It might have been.'

Kurt Vonnegut, Cat's Cradle

This week's decision by the city's waterfront design review panel to rubber-stamp a ho-hum building by architect Jack Diamond on a spectacular lake site is hardly surprising. Mediocre building is the legacy of Toronto's waterfront, and part of the long, unrequited love affair Torontonians -- including planners, architects and citizens -- have sustained with Lake Ontario.

The lake gives of itself every day. It isn't to blame. What is remarkable is the regular disdain hurled at its endless vistas, its meditative waters, its furious, seething mass.

And, so, the latest rebuff: a 10-storey building broken politely into two pieces and clad in a cold skin of glass. There is no kindly gesture extended to the water, not even a graceful canopy to acknowledge the lake. But there is a large, gaping entrance to a parking garage within metres of the crashing waves, and an atrium that depends on artificial lighting to achieve something like luminosity.

There might have been champagne. The site on Jarvis Quay is inspired.

The urban design review panel is mandated to shoot for excellence. Nearby, a series of exceptional landscapes by some of the world's best landscape architects will appear after winning design competitions. But there's no pop to the commercial building on Jarvis Quay, which will be the first stroke in a reinvented Toronto waterfront.

And Mr. Diamond, who has contributed tremendously to the tight urbanity of the city, isn't entirely to blame. The City of Toronto and the Toronto Economic Development Corporation, the city agency that hired Mr. Diamond, are responsible for upholding a time-honoured tradition along the waterfront: putting up buildings quick and dirty.

The process for "Project Symphony," as it is unfortunately named, has been fraught from the beginning.

Mr. Diamond was appointed by TEDCO without a design competition. Rather than spearheading a campaign of remarkable architecture on the waterfront, Mayor David Miller -- who assigned Mr. Diamond as his co-chair during his first electoral campaign -- has been pushing for the building to go ahead. A subcommittee of the urban design review panel was formed to accommodate TEDCO's hurry-up schedule. Paul Bedford, the former chief planner of Toronto, agreed to sit on the committee with architects Siamak Hariri and Bruce Kuwabara, the chair of the review panel.

For the first two meetings, Mr. Diamond didn't bother to show up, leaving a colleague, David Dow, to field questions and absorb recommendations. TEDCO wants shovels in the ground by July -- all of this to please its secret tenant.

This Thursday, during the third public review of the project, several of the panelists expressed their disappointment with the design. "What I've seen today is a substantial improvement over what we've seen in the past," said Mr. Bedford, referring to a previous, much boxier design that would have blocked public views to the water. "It speaks to the value of this urban design review panel. But," he added, "I don't think it's orgasmic."

Architect Tania Bortolotto called for an iconic building. "It doesn't have to be an OCAD," she said, referring to Will Alsop's startling design for an addition to the Ontario College of Art and Design. "But it should be something that architecture students around the world will come to see."

Architect Peter Clewes asked out loud: "What makes a waterfront building? Mr. Diamond's work has been to create modest buildings -- fabric buildings. . . . In Europe, there's an exuberance to their waterfront buildings."

From landscape architect Janet Rosenberg: "We have spent months and months reviewing works about the public realm. We always said as a group that the first building that came along for the waterfront really had to be in the spirit of the public realm. I don't feel that this is a public-realm building."

Mr. Diamond gathered his most imperial tone to admonish the panel for their temerity. "Iconic and exuberant -- that speaks to me of provincial insecurity. Toronto is made up of continuity and not discontinuities," he said.

By this, does Mr. Diamond mean to imply the public should expose itself to only one genre of literature, one sound, or indeed, one level of architecture? Is that all we can expect in this town, more of the same?

Let Hamburg hire Swiss luminaries Herzog & de Meuron to build its astonishing Elbe Philharmonic Hall, which lords over the river like an ethereal ship. Let Weiss/Manfredi architects carve a sculpture garden for the Seattle Art Museum next to Puget Sound. But on Toronto's waterfront, apparently, experiential architecture that engages and intrigues is destructive. As Mr. Diamond put it: "I think it's the destruction of our cities to endorse American individualism."

Oh, dear. What will the Americans think?

No matter. In the end, Mr. Diamond triumphed. The Toronto way triumphed.

And, sadly, Mr. Kuwabara caved under pressure from the mayor and TEDCO to get something, anything,built on the waterfront. It's not that Mr. Kuwabara thinks it's an exceptional design -- he says he'd give it a seven out of 10 -- but because, well, in Toronto, these things need to go ahead.

Only last week, Mr. Kuwabara spoke with passion about the possibilities for the site: "There's great waterfront architecture that's being done around the world. I keep showing the Institute of Contemporary Art by Diller and Scofidio because it's so engaged with the waterfront and it's become the cover image for Boston.

"Why not do a pier, something sculptural? In a very real way, this one is the first on a very prime site, and because it's on the water you'll see it twice, not only reflected in the water but also from the water itself."

Approval for Project Symphony is conditional, with the requirement that Mr. Diamond meet with the review panel to get the details of his design right. That should prove to be entertaining, especially if Mr. Diamond actually shows up.

lrochon@globeandmail.com

Taller, Better

April 15th, 2007, 04:29 PM

Move on, Gnome, or it will eat away at you forever. Maybe a career change is in the cards. :)

Metro Gnome

April 15th, 2007, 05:01 PM

Move on, Gnome, or it will eat away at you forever. Maybe a career change is in the cards. :)

On your way to 7100 posts, and you continue to keep it personal by avoiding the content of people's posts.

BTW, Diamond & Schmitt are hiring. Interested?

phunky

April 15th, 2007, 08:03 PM

If there is one thing Taller, Better isn't, it's elitist.

Metro Gnome

April 15th, 2007, 09:37 PM

If there is one thing Taller, Better isn't, it's elitist.

Who is this nauseous person...?

I am not sure that a Union website (bluecaller or otherwise) could be entirely unbiased, Could explain why the guy was chronically nauseous.

You still going on about that? Maybe it is time you just "moved on" in life and let it go.

Move on, Gnome...

Elitism: The belief that certain persons or members of certain classes or groups deserve favoured treatment by virtue of their perceived superiority, as in intellect, social status, or financial resources.

Good to see people getting passionate about architecture in this city.

I guess only members of certain (skyscrapercity) groups are welcome to be passionate about architecture here. Feels elitist to me.

This is a public forum and I'm not leaving, at least not yet. I do sense an anti-unionist undertone in this thread though. Don't forget, the architects among those who design the feature films you watch, are union members, as are those technicians who build and film them. Taller, better skyscrapers are built by union members.

However, unionism is not my passion. Can we move on?

Waterloo_Guy

April 16th, 2007, 01:38 AM

Gnome, you're definition of elitism looks to be about right, but none of TB's comments qualify him as elitist. It sounds like you just don't like it when people call you on stuff.

kettal

April 16th, 2007, 06:46 AM

Are the writers of Hollywood films unionized too? Cause they suck.

Taller, Better

April 16th, 2007, 04:57 PM

MetroGnome, I am not anti-Union, I belong to a union and support it. But sometimes in life you just have to "let go" of some things, and I think now is the time for you to let go of the fact that the film industry in Toronto is changing and in the process some studios had to be closed and relocated (as opposed to just being closed). Sorry if that came across as being elitist to you and maybe I pushed the issue too hard. It is good to have new members here who bring different ideas to the table. But there is more to SSC than just discussing the union aspect of the local film industry.. so feel free to join in about the architectural discussions too!

Dino Domingo

April 17th, 2007, 01:43 AM

This is what happens when people working for the city are more concerned with putting check marks in boxes.

And just think, some of these people want to tear down Yonge St. and start over.
:sly:

Was that rhetorical? Explain the last sentence.

Tuscani01

April 19th, 2007, 07:41 PM

Looks like the lead tenant for Project Symphony is Corus Entertainment:

Corus likely 'symphony' tenant
Port lands development
Peter Kuitenbrouwer, National Post
Published: Thursday, April 19, 2007

Property owners in Toronto's thriving Liberty Village neighbourhood are concerned about the City of Toronto's apparent plan to lure the area's biggest tenant, Corus Entertainment Inc., to an office building the city plans to build in the port lands.

Bob Eisenberg, a partner in York Heritage Properties, which owns the Carpet Factory near King and Dufferin streets, says he has heard from several commercial property agents that Corus is the tenant for a plan known around city hall as "Project Symphony."

"This is the fastest-growing employment area in the city," Mr. Eisenberg said yesterday, sitting in his office at the carefully restored Carpet Factory. "And now the city is threatening to reverse the momentum. If this was any other city in North America, they'd be throwing money at us."

The city-owned Toronto Economic Development Corp., or TEDCO, has hired Diamond & Schmitt architects to design a 10- storey building on city land just east of the Redpath sugar refinery on Queens Quay Boulevard, at the foot of Jarvis Street. TEDCO says it has a signed deal with a media company that will move its 1,100 employees from "all over" Toronto to the new building. But TEDCO says it must wait to let the tenant disclose the deal at the appropriate moment, because it is a publicly traded company.

Corus, controlled by the Shaw family of Calgary, did not return calls in the past two days.

Corus companies in Liberty Village include Nelvana, the creator of such animated children's shows as Franklin, Little Bear and Miss Spider's Sunny Patch Friends, at 42 Pardee Ave. Nearby on Jefferson Street is Corus Specialty TV, including YTV, Treehouse, W Network and Discovery Kids. Several radio stations are nearby.

Corus has its executive head office in BCE Place and other radio stations, including 102.1 The Edge and Q107, in the Eaton Centre at 1 Dundas St. W.

(The company also owns radio stations across Canada.)

Yesterday, none of the employees streaming into Corus companies in Liberty Village had any idea of an impending move to the port lands.

But Michael Emory, chief executive at Allied Canadian Corp., the landlord of Nelvana on Pardee Avenue, said he, too, "has heard the same rumour that you have heard. I have heard several people in the market say it is Corus."

Putting all of Corus under one roof "is something they've wanted to do for a long time," Mr. Emory said. "Whether it makes sense locationally is another question."

He also had questions about the deal. "Are the taxpayers subsidizing the city's real estate developments?" he asked. "If the city is subsidizing uneconomic development, for a city that is virtually broke, it seems like an odd thing to do."

He said Nelvana's lease extends "well into the next decade." And even so, "We feel Liberty Village will do just fine, with or without Corus."

Jeff Steiner, the chief executive of TEDCO, refused to comment on whether Corus is its mystery tenant. "The company will make itself known at the appropriate time," he said. Mr. Steiner defends the project as an opportunity to bring "knowledge" jobs to the port; in February TEDCO evicted its longtime tenant, Cinespace Studios, from Marine Terminal 28, which TEDCO plans to demolish for the new office building.

On Friday, Project Symphony was listed on the agenda for a Monday meeting of city council's executive committee. But on Monday, a new agenda came out removing the item.

Mr. Eisenberg said the city is spending its money in the wrong place. "TEDCO and Economic Development will be taking 800 to 1,000 jobs out of an area they've just declared an employment area," he said.

"The City of Toronto has spent $30-million or more on planning studies for the East Bayfront and can't hire a planner for Liberty Village."

Other tenants in Liberty Village include Sony BMG, Sirius satellite radio, Vision TV, Softchoice Corp., 91.1 Jazz FM, and Labatt's Brewery.

Pkuitenbrouwer@nationalpost.com

Jaborandi

April 20th, 2007, 12:25 AM

[QUOTE=Tuscani01;12741988]Looks like the lead tenant for Project Symphony is Corus Entertainment:

Bingo - you got it!

kettal

April 20th, 2007, 02:03 AM

I don't understand why this location is so important to a radio conglomerate? They might as well be in high-rise offices in town.

Jaborandi

April 20th, 2007, 03:51 AM

I don't understand why this location is so important to a radio conglomerate? They might as well be in high-rise offices in town.

They are far more than a radio conglomerate. They have branched out into specialty TV cable channels in a big way and I believe they have made it their corporate mission to find the lowest common denominator in both viewer and artistic tastes, so in that sense the banal architecture of their new home is a perfect reflection of their company identity. Think of it as our own little piece of Calgary-by-the-Lake.

kettal

April 20th, 2007, 06:47 AM

:lol:

Their TV channels staff is basically one employee playing a stack of old VHS tapes.

Taller, Better

April 20th, 2007, 07:31 AM

so in that sense the banal architecture of their new home is a perfect reflection of their company identity. Think of it as our own little piece of Calgary-by-the-Lake.

Oh dear.... that sounds depressing, doesn't it? :ohno:

addisonwesley

April 27th, 2007, 09:45 PM

Apr 27, 2007 04:30 AM
John Spears
CITY HALL BUREAU

Toronto taxpayers should put up a $132 million loan to finance the Project Symphony commercial development on the waterfront, says a staff report.

The seven-storey development by the city-owned Toronto Economic Development Co. (TEDCO) would be leased primarily to Corus Entertainment.

The project is supposed to create 1,300 jobs and kick-start development on the East Bayfront section of the waterfront, east of the Tate & Lyle sugar refinery.

But the staff report cautions that there are risks attached to the project, according to an analysis by Sannek Associates Inc.

"According to Sannek's assessment, the project is likely to yield a financial return that is lower than would be acceptable for a private investor, given the project's risk profile," says the staff report.

It doesn't say what that expected return would be, although there's an expectation the city will get its money back.

Because of the below-market return – and because TEDCO is legally required to borrow through the city – it will be up to taxpayers to finance $132 million of the project's $159.5 million cost, says the report. That's money the city will itself need to borrow first.

The rest of the funding will come from TEDCO's own resources and those of the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp.

Income from the project should be enough to cover the city's borrowing costs, the report says. If not, "there could be a negative impact on the city's operating budget and its credit rating."

Can the city afford the risk?

Councillor Kyle Rae, who heads Toronto's economic development committee, turns the question around, saying the city "can't afford not to do it."

"This is a project that will provide a new home for Corus," said Rae, who represents Ward 27, Toronto Centre-Rosedale, and is also a director of TEDCO.

"It will be the first employment land development on the waterfront. It will serve as an excellent buffer between the sugar refinery and the rest of the East Bayfront."

The project shouldn't be viewed in isolation, Rae said, but as a catalyst for the rest of the waterfront.

"It is the first development in the East Bayfront ... That's how it's justified from a business perspective."

But the plan faces questions from other councillors.

Cliff Jenkins (Ward 25, Don Valley West) wants assurances the main tenant is committed to a long-term lease if the city is going to be on the hook for a long-term loan.

Bisonblight

April 27th, 2007, 11:38 PM

This whole thing is bullsh*t. How is it gonna create 1300 jobs if Corus is just consolidating its operations in Toronto?

phunky

April 28th, 2007, 01:04 AM

So this development by a corporation wants taxpayers to pay for the building? Huh?

Also if this building is being viewed as the catalyst to the waterfront proposal, then we are in BIG trouble.

ScrapeTheSky

April 28th, 2007, 01:08 AM

Why should the city finance a subpar building? Especially when it's not even creating any new permanent jobs? Especially in such an important location.

plumbum

April 28th, 2007, 03:35 AM

When I read this this morning in the paper I was shocked. Why the heck should we subsidize a corporation that is building such an ugly monstrosity by the lake. I think we have more than enough of those by Harbourfront. Lets trash this project and wait for a good proposal. Maybe the Toronto Star should demolish it's butt ugly building on Yonge and build a beautiful new main building on this site instead.

KGB

April 28th, 2007, 04:01 AM

So this development by a corporation wants taxpayers to pay for the building? Huh?

No...they are just a lead tennant for the developer (TEDCO)...same as any office building finds a lead tennant before building.

Also if this building is being viewed as the catalyst to the waterfront proposal, then we are in BIG trouble.

That's pretty much the problem in a nutshell. It's the city that's supposed to be protecting us from bad design from the private sector developers...especially our new waterfront development where precident is so important.. And in this case, it's the city itself that's the culprit...and that aint good. And to add insult to injury, it appears it's not even a good financial deal.

Maybe the Toronto Star should demolish it's butt ugly building on Yonge and build a beautiful new main building on this site instead.

I don't think demolishing it is a practical solution...but a complete gut and re-facade job would be perfect. I think eventually it will happen...would make a perfect condo/hotel conversion.

KGB

thryve

April 28th, 2007, 05:41 AM

Strip it down and give it a simple glass curtain wall and I'm happy. :cheers:

(The Toronto Star building, I mean)

phunky

April 28th, 2007, 05:54 AM

Strip it down and give it a simple glass curtain wall and I'm happy. :cheers:

(The Toronto Star building, I mean)
I really don't mine the Star building. It's not amazing or anything. But yes a simple glass curtain wall would look nice. A la Bay/Adelaide.

addisonwesley

May 1st, 2007, 01:03 PM

May 01, 2007 04:30 AM
Paul Moloney
CITY HALL BUREAU

A $159.5 million taxpayer-financed waterfront building was enthusiastically endorsed yesterday by city council's powerful executive committee.

The seven-storey office development, to be leased to Toronto-based Corus Entertainment, is to be built with a $132 million loan from the city, $15 million from the city's economic development agency and $12.5 million from the Toronto Waterfront Revitalization Corp.

The project is seen as a way to bring 1,300 jobs to the East Bayfront section of the waterfront, just east of the Tate & Lyle (formerly Redpath) sugar refinery.

Developers want to put up condominiums on the north side of Queen's Quay, so it's important to secure jobs on the water's edge, said TWRC president John Campbell.

"From our point of view on the public side, I think the onus is on us on the south side to try to drive as much commercial development as possible and get jobs down there," he said. "That is really, really critical."

The return on the public investment is estimated at 8 to 8.5 per cent, slightly lower than a private sector investor would require, said Joe Pennachetti, the city's chief financial officer.

Another public benefit is the expectation surrounding public lands will rise in value, the committee was told.

"Council at the end of the day must weight the project's public benefits," Pennachetti said. "From my perspective, the employment benefit kickoff for the waterfront is a very positive force for us moving forward..."

Mayor David Miller urged councillors to look beyond the city's naysaying political culture. "We need to learn how to say yes." If approved by council, construction would begin in August, with Corus moving into the building in November 2009.