I was forwarded the following concept sketch from Greg Heil, chair of the Windsor Heritage Committee:
Following the news that came out about the TD move to build a new HQ in downtown Windsor on the site of the old Manning House.
Mr. Heil, who is an Architect sketched up this idea, as a possible way to incorporate the old TD Bank facade that’s in storage, into the new building.
He’s sent the sketch along and asked me to post his idea, and see what the readers of IM.com thought about it?
TD had proposed a glass box, but this is a great chance to reuse that TD facade…
Comments?
When I first saw the picture, I thought it was an editorial cartoon! I am not really sure what to think about this. I think it’s great that they’d think about reusing the old facade, but it looks like a spaceship crashed into it. Maybe I’d like it better if was a coloured rendering? Right now, I just can’t picture it…
The problem is they aren’t thinking about reusing the facade. This was a concept drawn up, to show them that reuse is possible.
This kind of reuse happens all the time here in Toronto. Some people like it, some don’t — I think most are somewhere in middle, as I am. “Facadism” is a term I’ve heard. If the building can’t be preserved as is, I think it can be a good compromise — though it looses what I like about old buildings — the weird nooks, the thought that these are the same floors people walked on 80 years ago, etc. Though it was unlikely I’d see much of the interior, so the exterior is what counts in most of our day-to-day existence.
Though the aesthetic of the “crashed spaceship” Scooter speaks of is very much at the core of the “Toronto look” which is only beginning to be understood/appreciated. Old buildings and very modern glass and steel structures either right next to each other or part of the same building are all over this city. Think of the ROM crystal as the extreme expression of this. I love it — old buildings appreciated, but not in an overly precious way — bought right into the present. New and old, working together perfectly.
The orthodox preservationists hate it — they despise the ROM crystal — but many of us part ways (though not commitment) at this point..
BCE Place is amazing in Toronto. Great re-use of old building – even though they are just facades.
I think the “crashed spaceship” analogy is pretty bang-on.
However, when it comes to the vomit that Windsor usually ends up with, it rocks. I hate to be the one to perpetuate that “lesser of two evils” approach, but that’s where we’ve ended up here in Windsor. The old Ouelette/Riverside TD facade needs to be reused, if only to end our monthly storage costs. I hope the developer looks to Mr. Heils initiative as a worthwhile suggestin as opposed to a threat and/or demand.
I wonder how Mr. Heil envisions the rest of the block? Isn’t O’Ryans pub disapearing as well? How will this corner integrate with the rest of downtown and Shanfields to the north? Will there be any public spaces built in to make the walk appealing to those on foot? A water feature, perhaps, built to delight the pedestrian as s/he makes walking a larger part of his/her daily routine?
We must start to demand better in this city. Architecture was meant to be a multi-disciplinary practise, combining the needs of the client as well as the city as a whole. It should add to the public realm and build some social capital in the neighbourhood.
…er, I meant “Shanfields to the south”. My inner-compass is vacationing this long weekend.
i think it’s fine ! would like it even better if the glass was tinted black especially. not with the blue tint crap. dark smokey tint ! it was stand out nicely with great contrast. but it won’t happen who are we kidding. i can’ t stand glass buildings but in this case it has a nice old beautiful mask !
Chris, one thing at a time… Let’s get them to even consider reusing the facade before we worry about the rest 😉
Interesting concept, although this design has one major problem.
I tend to be hesident when it comes to any “new school” artecture because it runs the risk of becoming dated very quickly, in the same way that googie or the style of the Cleary Guest House became dated a half hour after they were introduced.
Now, having said that, the concept of reusing the facade is a good one. Stick it on some construction that compliments it instead of making it look like an old brown shoe, and it should work.
It’s good enough for me. Now, if they could find a way to incorporate the Patrick O’Ryan’s building into this whole scheme, I’d be a lot happier.
Maybe if they put Patrick O’Ryan’s on top of the spaceship? 🙂
We can only wish and pray that the new TD building ends up looking like the sketch above. Let’s hope that TD incorporates lots of retail space into the ground floor of the new building. We don’t need TD giving us another dead zone downtown like Scotiabank or the RBC did.
It looks like someone spliced a tape of The Jetsons into Back to the Future. Looks like they had to stick a facade somewhere, so might as well stick it on a contemporary glass building. That mixed-period look just doesn’t set well; eclectic is great, but mixing two extreme periods gives the impression that the facade couldn’t be better used in a more suitable format, so instead of losing it, just stick it in front of a new building. Recycling gone bad.
I’m all for preservation, but that concept just looks silly–and I’m being really charitable here. In Toronto, they have new construction among preserved WHOLE buildings, not just facades. Nice try…
Keep in mind Steve the facade has been in storage since 1999… What do we do with it?
I think resuing the TD Facade, on the new TD building is a win-win.
If anyone thinks that we’ll get anything different than a glass box you’re crazy… I like the idea, keep in mind this is only a quick sketch. The guy that drew it, isn’t on the project, he was just using it as an example of how it could be reused. As Shawn pointed out above it happens all the time in Toronto. I would rather have only the facade to look at than nothing at all…
Making an un-educated guess, I would imagine the reason behind constructing a glass box is to make it both modern looking and (more importantly) cheap. It would be nice if the bank used all those huge profits they have been making up until recently (and they may be, still) to build something that would stand another hundred years. In that way, using the old facade would be easier. But I am not holding my breath. So, having a choice between a design that uses the facade, or one that does not, I would be happier with one that does use it.
It shocks me that nobody at TD wants to use a piece of their own history in the construction of a new building.
as mentioned already, i only hope that there is some retail storefront added so as not to make it a dead zone like what has happened with the other banks. I’d be all for the use of the old facade though.
Something that not many people have mentioned as they praise this new construction downtown though…they are shutting down 2 existing TD Banks in the downtown core. So really, this helps downtown how?
I want it all – and I want it NOW!
Mixing the old with the blatantly new would actually be preferable. I don’t know if you’ve ever seen an old building that the owner put an addition on but tried to match the building materials and architectural style, but unless you spend a veritable fortune it normally comes out looking like ass (to use Andrew’s term) The juxtaposition between old and new plays out very well in this sketch.
I hear ya, David II. It seems that very few people are interested in the past. It’s old? Throw it away!
Andrew – do you know how much the city is shelling out per year to store the facade?
Chris – I’m not sure. But it’s stored at a city owned building, so the cost in reality is likely minimal, although I’m sure there is a bloated cost on paper somewhere…
As for retail, don’t hold your breath. From what I understand this will be a single tennat use. TD is not interested in sharing with anyone. Ground floor will be a bank, that’s it.
Adriano, as far as I know only the bank at the corner of Ouellette and Wyandotte will become vacant. Where’s the second one?
Andrew : University at Victoria? (the other branch)
i think you’re right there john.
i don’t know about that glass hat. do we know if it’s only supposed to take up the itty bitty corner like in the drawing? if so, why tear down patrick o’ryan’s?
i thought this was supposed to be a 4 story building, why only use 1 floor?
i don’t know if that idea will even fly in this city. it’s not like you can put stucco on glass in 5 years.
yes, John, the branch at the corner of University and Victoria is the second location
I can see closing the branch on Victoria and University (The old Grey(?) Trust building that my used) but closing the one on Wyandotte and Ouellette is crazy, it is on two major transits routes and a major intersection in this city, it is a very busy branch because of its location.
As to the sketch above, sorry it doesn’t jive with me. What i would like to see is the green or whatever glass skin on the outside, then the old facade forming an entrance lobby into the bank, a quiet mini third place, a moment in steps from the street into the bank.
What is this horrible news about Patrick O. Ryan’s shutting down shop? Are they ever going to relocate or reopen? This is very sad news that I haven’t heard anywhere else.
Thanks guys. I forgot about the Victoria/University branch.
I have a feeling they are just a tennat there. There was major restorative work done on the stone work recently, so I doubt TD owns it, as if they planned to close it, they wouldn’t have invested the cash.
That branch isn’t on the Inventory, and the Ouellette/Wyandotte one was remodeled about 10-15 years ago, completely ruining the original design of the building. You can see a glimpse of it pre-renovation here: http://internationalmetropolis.com/?p=475 It dates to the late 60’s, designed by the local firm, Johnson & McWhinnie.
Jolie – Patrick O’Ryans is only a tennant, they don’t the building. The property owner is selling the building as part of the new bank devolpment. I have heard that a “Parking Garage” is part of the plan, my guess is that’s where the garage is going.
As for reopening, I don’t know what their plans are. Word on the street has demolition starting next month.
Also the Manning House resolution NOT to Designate and for TD to examine Reuse of the TD Facade is on the Council Agenda tonight: http://www.citywindsor.ca/DisplayAttach.asp?AttachID=11666
Why isn’t the wording “no designation on condition they use the facade” instead of the developer being “encouraged” to use the facade? It’s completely toothless. It doesn’t sound like there’s any REAL compromise here. It’s too bad somebody couldn’t make a last minute motion to change the wording.
Ah yes, more parking “garages”. As if downtown needs more of them. If I get this right please let me know.
In Windsor we level buildings to decrease density (yes DECREASE), yet build more parking garages. We then allow banks to play shuffle board along our main downtown road closing buildings, building new ones only to vacate them later on.
Gotta love Windsor logic!
I am with Chris. Why can’t we have more pleasing structures on our sidewalks or in the middle of streets such as fountains, reflective pools, sculptures…Those horrible looking locust trees just don’t cut it!
I have heard that a “Parking Garage†is part of the plan, my guess is that’s where the garage is going.
isn’t there a parking garage already on the corner? wow…a parking garage next to a parking garage.
Come on pc, that’s the Windsor Way! If I have to walk more than 10 feet, it’s not useable… Unless it’s a sprawled out strip mall, then I’ll walk 1000 feet to the front door!
Urbanrat, that idea is great. Incorporate the old design into a contemporary building, literally–I like the idea of a new structure on the outside, with the historical features in the lobby or other interior area. Why didn’t I think of that?
Just not another glass and future-stucco monstrosity exterior.
I think the idea is great. I just hope that the building is a lot taller than that and has some street level retail. We need to increase density downtown and to increase white-collar employment. The parking garage is OK if it is underground. That way it serves it’s function but is not visible.
To make Windsor folk feel better, people here in Toronto complain just as much that “we tear down everything”. There is more money here and the city is economically viable, so more stuff gets built to replace the old, but the complaints are similar. “How did we lose this building?” etc.