Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Chance of a Thunderstorm
20°/16°
It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Partly Cloudy
21°/14°
It is forcast to be Chance of a Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 27, 2012
Chance of a Thunderstorm
22°/12°

7 Comments

news

Future Course for the Concourse?

20110713newdesign.jpg
Rendering of proposed tower for 100 Adelaide Street West, with facade of Concourse Building incorporated into southeast corner.


For over a decade, the Concourse Building has been on borrowed time. The art deco office building, whose unique features include mosaics designed by Group of Seven artist J.E.H. MacDonald, has waited while its owner, Oxford Properties, decided how to place a new tower on the site. The latest design for 100 Adelaide Street West might be a lovely building on its own—the top of its glass tower vaguely resembles the originally promised design of the ROM crystal—but, at first glance, the inclusion of the facade of a gutted Concourse Building resembles a pasted-on afterthought. If realized, the tower would join the long list of examples of facadism found around Toronto’s core.


20110713ads.jpg
Advertisements, (left) the Toronto Star, February 2, 1929, (centre), the Globe, March 15, 1929, (right) the Globe, March 23, 1929.

When it opened in 1929, the Concourse was considered a colourful, vital addition to the city’s core, one that other builders could draw inspiration from. “Ornament is not artificially applied,” noted Construction magazine. “The building is arresting and striking, because the qualities belonging to a skyscraper are not hidden, but emphasized. It should not be assumed that the materials were casually chosen; on the contrary a glance reveals that none but materials most appropriate to the design have been selected to produce the resulting effect.” The Globe praised the developers for giving “bold and enduring recognition to Canadian creative artists in two mediums in erecting a Toronto skyscraper.”
Besides the mosaics the building is known for, the interior included quotations from eight poems. “Big business,” noted the Globe, “has bowed to creative art, mind’s power over matter is acknowledged, and those whose poetry is expressed in the creation of castles and the building of railways pay homage to those whose music is found in the written word.”

20110713telyphoto.jpg
Source: the Telegram, February 26, 1929.

One of the chosen poets, Charles G.D. Roberts, praised the building’s beauty in the Telegram:

The Concourse calls attention to itself first of all by proclaiming its faith in beauty not only of line but of colour, and by paying unequivocal tribute to Canadian art and Canadian poetry. When from the southeast corner of Bay and Adelaide one catches the gold-and-scarlet radiance of those slender pinnacles delicately sharp against the sky, one feels that here the old drabness has been challenged, not by a defiance of tradition, but by a most persuasive call, to an older and fearless tradition of beauty.

20110713citynotice99.jpg
Advertisement, the Toronto Star, June 16, 1999.

Oxford bought the Concourse Building in 1998 and quickly applied for permission to demolish it as part of its plan to reshape the block it now owned. The original proposal maintained only the bottom three floors amid a 41-storey tower. There were no guarantees that all of the original art and detailing, some of which had been covered up during renovation attempts over the years, would be preserved. The plans aroused the wrath of architectural and heritage advocates, and irritated developers who had successfully renovated historic buildings. As Robert Fulford noted in the National Post, “the building may be worn and ill-used, but it could at a reasonable cost be brought back to vibrant life by one of those sensitive developers who have been reviving downtown structures ranging from warehouses to tall buildings from the same era as the Concourse.” An attempt by Margie Zeidler (who had just redeveloped 401 Richmond) and Michael Tippin (who owned the Flatiron Building) to buy the Concourse from Oxford failed. Zeidler’s bitterness was evident in an interview with the Globe and Mail: “You will be sure the developer will demolish the Concourse as fast as they can. When it’s down, who’s going to argue about it?”
The demolition request was considered by city council in May 2000 and passed by a 38-12 vote. The result prompted Globe and Mail columnist Lisa Rochon to lash out at the mindset behind the half-hearted preservation effort:

Toronto’s city council has ignored the counsel of countless historic agencies and art experts, preferring ignoble genuflection at the feet of a developer. Why advocate for the complexity of a metropolis when the experience can be so wonderfully dumbed down? Bye-bye, building. Time to kick out your brick walls. Sixteen stories of sheer vertical amounting to not very high. Built in 1928—what a dump! Gonna bust it down. But save those tile pictures of Canadian wheat and running salmon and the sunburst framing the front door. We’re so sophisticated we’ll keep those. Have you ever heard of the Group of Seven? Don’t be stupid. J.E.H. MacDonald was one of them. He made the mosaics. Pretty, aren’t they? We’ll glue them onto the new 41-storey tower.


But the Concourse earned a stay of execution. As city council voted, Oxford announced that they would commence construction when the economic conditions were right to do so. Activists continued to fight to save the building from becoming another example of facadism. Unlike the original proposal, the current design for 100 Adelaide West doesn’t remove any of the Concourse’s floors, but maintains little of its interior. It bears a passing resemblance to the integration of the National Building into the 51-storey Bay Adelaide Centre. Oxford’s pitch reel to prospective tenants promises an airy, sterile working environment within 615,000 square feet of available space.
As architectural advocate Adam Sobolak notes, while it might be better to keep the Concourse Building and operate it along the lines of thriving nearby office towers of similar vintage like the Sterling Tower and build the new complex north of the Concourse in place of an existing parking garage or atop the Federal Building, optics may be playing a role in Oxford’s moves. “They’re less ‘choice’ locations,” says Sobolak, “whether due to the tight awkwardness of side-street locations or the bleakness of Richmond relative to Adelaide, plus the fact that the Federal Building currently contains high-security banking operations that are more difficult to dislodge than the common office tenants of the Concourse.”

20110713groundview.jpg
Ground-level rendering of 100 Adelaide Street West.


While there are characterless older buildings whose passing would be little mourned, the Concourse has enough going for it that merits more than just incorporating it into a dissimilar tower. In different hands, it might have become a lovely renovated little building that would have garnered high rental income for its owners from tenants interested in operating out of a cool heritage site. Despite that the Concourse is one of the last prime examples of art deco office architecture in Toronto, the sketches of the interior of the proposed 41-storey tower draw no inspiration from that era. The remnants of the Concourse may end up as little more than a passing curio for downtown office workers to blink at as they head to their cubicles in the Richmond Adelaide Centre.
Additional material from the May 1929 issue of Construction and the following newspapers: the April 6, 1929 edition of the Globe; the March 3, 2000, March 23, 2000, and May 17, 2000 editions of the Globe and Mail; the May 8, 2000 edition of the National Post; the May 10, 2000 edition of the Toronto Star; and the March 26, 1929 edition of the Telegram.

Comments

  • drybrain

    Jesus, I didn't imagine this would happen in 2011. Toronto's got lots of great heritage buildings, but very few heritage high-rises. This would be a real loss.

  • Canadianskeezix

    I have not closely enough reviewed the plans for the proposed new building to
    be able to intelligently formulate an opinion on the proposal.  I suspect the the Concourse Building doesn't sufficiently read as a “separate” building in the proposal, but it's hard to conclude for sure based on these drawings.  But I will say a thing or two about so-called “facadism”.  The term “facadism” is thrown around so frequently to refer negatively to so many disparate types of development that the term itself, much like “political correctness” before it, has ceased to have any real meaning.   More often than not, haughtily dismissing a development proposal as “facadism” says more about the person complaining than it does about the proposal itself.  

    That's not to say that we should refrain from criticizing redevelopments that incorporate the facades of old buildings.  Far from it.  The use of the facade of the Ralph Day Funeral Home in the new Shoppers Drug Mart on the Danforth is shockingly terrible (it would have been better to demolish the whole funeral home), and the incorporation of the John Lyle studio facade at One Bedford is not much better.  But incorporating heritage facades into new buildings is not in and of itself terrible.  Like everything else, each proposal should be judged on its own merits.  That is a far more helpful approach that tossing around relatively meaningless and inflammatory labels like “facadism”.

  • http://twitter.com/ryan_says Ryan Murphy

    I have an office at the Concourse building. They just put in three new elevators. In theory some of the original details remain, the elevator lobbies on each floor are terrazzo with brass details in the floor. However the building is generally in horrible shape inside, it had drop ceilings, fluorescent lighting and AC badly installed years ago so there is really not much to miss. If you look above the ceiling tiles you can see what it looked like at one time, lots of bulkheads concealing ducts now. The bathrooms and back stair are like something that belongs in a submarine. Seems to be a lot of dudes with hard hats in the elevators, not sure if they are working on other stuff in the building though. In general, except for the elevators, you would get the impression that they are waiting to reno or tear down.

  • drybrain

    It can always be restored. The “it's decrepit and ugly” argument is frequently used to justify destroying old buildings. Just because it's got a crummy AC system and some ugly lighting is no reason to destroy it.

  • http://treehugger.com Lloyd Alter

    every part of a building has a different lifespan, and mech systems are the shortest. that doesn't mean you throw out the whole thing. It is a great building with great bones.

  • http://twitter.com/ryan_says Ryan Murphy

    my comment was in reply to an earlier question (now edited) about the inside of the building. Just pointing out that there's nothing charming about the current state of the building. And I love old stuff. It is not (and never was) even remotely close to the building across the street at 320 Bay (Canada Permanent Trust building).

  • http://www.facebook.com/profile.php?id=727561980 Susan Carroll-Clark

    The Canada Permanent has that glorious lobby and banking hall, both restored. I've been in the Concourse, too, and have to agree there seems on the surface less to work with.  I'd hate to see it reduced to a facade, but I'd rather see that than see it gone completely.