SkyscraperCity Forum banner
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
Discussion starter · #1 ·
Art gallery, neighbours reach pact on new look

By JAMES ADAMS
Saturday, February 5, 2005 - Page A13

The $195-million renovation and expansion of the Art Gallery of Ontario seems almost certain to occur now after individuals and groups bitterly opposed to the development reached a surprise agreement with gallery officials late yesterday.

"It's a very wonderful outcome," Matthew Teitelbaum, director of the AGO, said last night. "We have been talking for the last 36 hours on this. . . . I think what's happened speaks of the community co-operation that we'd always hoped for."

The talks, conducted at city hall, were initiated Wednesday by the Grange Park Preservation Group, one of the key opponents of the development, designed by Frank Gehry, the Los Angeles-based, Toronto-born superstar architect.

Using CITY-TV urban affairs reporter Adam Vaughan as a "facilitator," the group presented the AGO with a list of conditions that, if met, would result in a withdrawal of its appeals. Negotiations began Thursday, primarily between Mr. Vaughan (who lives near the AGO and says he was acting as a concerned resident) and Steve Diamond, the AGO's high-powered lawyer, perhaps most famous in Toronto real-estate circles for getting approval for the huge Minto condominium towers development at Yonge Street and Eglinton Avenue three years ago.

Until yesterday, it appeared the AGO and its opponents were in for a lengthy, expensive hearing at the Ontario Municipal Board, the quasi-judicial body that rules on development appeals. The AGO, facing seven appellants at a hearing slated to begin Monday and run five days, needed a "win" at the OMB if its wish to start construction in May was to be realized.

Last November, city council unanimously approved the redesign, which, upon its completion in 2008, will stand as Mr. Gehry's first public commission in his hometown.

Yesterday's agreement, reached initially around 4 p.m. with six of the seven appellants, involves no major alterations to the wood, glass and titanium design that Mr. Gehry has been refining since he unveiled its initial iteration in January, 2004. Instead, in exchange for getting neighbourhood "permission" to proceed with its plans (including the erection of a tall tower on its south end), the AGO has agreed to nine conditions.

These include a commitment to "consult with its neighbours in regard to any further expansion of the AGO" after the Gehry design is completed as well as a refusal to erect billboards or advertising facing Grange Park to the gallery's south. The AGO also agreed to the "immediate rezoning" of a small parking lot to the gallery's southeast into a park; the provision of $40,000 for "alternative recreational programs" during construction of the renovation; the creation of a crosswalk on Beverley Street (the gallery's western perimeter); and "fully subsidized placements" of local children in AGO art programs during the annual spring break and summer vacation, for a period of 10 years.

"We felt it was the right thing to do for the neighbourhood and the gallery," said Ceta Ramkhalawansingh, one of the main organizers of the opposition to the redevelopment, which will increase the AGO's viewing space for art by 40 per cent. Ms. Ramkhalawansingh, who lives just to the west of the gallery, was a major opponent of the AGO's last expansion, completed in 1993.

As of last evening, the one holdout on the deal was Steve Mann, a professor with the University of Toronto's electrical- and computer-engineering department. However, around 8 p.m., the AGO announced he had joined his fellow appellants in signing a withdrawal of his appeal. A pioneer of wearable computer technologies, Mr. Mann lives and works in a property directly across from the AGO, on Dundas Street West. At community consultation meetings last spring and summer, he expressed concern that the development might affect airflow and sunlight -- his property has rooftop solar panels.

Representatives of the appellants and the AGO are still expected to appear before the OMB Monday morning because the board has to review the settlement offers.

As a result of yesterday's agreement, the only big hurdle the AGO now faces is money. The gallery received a total of $48-million from the Ontario and federal governments for its expansion plans. Kenneth Thomson, Canada's most famous art collector, has announced he would be giving $300-million in art and $70-million in cash. The financial shortfall is now estimated to be $70-million.










^ It will be interesting to see these two together.
 
So those 3 staircases and the dashboard are supposed to make up for that hideous box?

I'd love to have a Gehry in this city, but this chop-job isn't what should be built.
 
I much prefer this to another Bilbao rip-off. So will everyone else in the architectural world...which is why I think this project will save his artistic credibility ass even though it is a difficult and challenging project. If it wasn't, all we would be getting is another Bilbao rip-off. Having to face the difficulties of this project is the best thing that could have happened to him.

Grange Park is going to be one very interesting little downtown park surrounded by some interesting architecture....1817 Georgian and Gehry on the north...Alsop on the east...and on the south, some Uno Prii 60's stuff with a victorian church thrown in for good measure.




KGB
 
KGB said:
I much prefer this to another Bilbao rip-off. So will everyone else in the architectural world...which is why I think this project will save his artistic credibility ass even though it is a difficult and challenging project.
Wow, you now speak for the entire architectural community? When did you get that promotion. LOL :)

Sorry but this project is a mess of parts stuck together. There's no cohesivness to the whole project. The front looks like an after though, and the box on top seems ignored. The only redeeming quality is the staircase, which has a unique form, but I don't think a creative staircase is worth $200 million.

I do not want another Bilbao, but I also don't want this chop-job of a project. Mind you, I'm not at all faulting Gehry for this, he had some absolutely tremendous designs, but because of budgetary constraints, he was unable to use any of them.

If the AGO wants a Gehry, they should be willing to pay for it, if they're not, they should get someone else who can make a design that looks cohesive, and ties the entire series of renovations together, while fitting it in under the predetermined budget.
 
Discussion starter · #9 ·
I think the AGO expansion has more to do with interior renovations than exterior. I don't want another Biblao either. For all the attention that museum gets how many people actually know what type of musuem it actually is?

You don't want the building to overshadow the reason for it's purpose. A lot of Gehry projects end up like that. More about the building than what's actually inside.

I think the opposite of the AGO. A unique feat for Gehry.
 
sk8rboiiii said:
Wow, you now speak for the entire architectural community? When did you get that promotion. LOL :)

Sorry but this project is a mess of parts stuck together. There's no cohesivness to the whole project. The front looks like an after though, and the box on top seems ignored. The only redeeming quality is the staircase, which has a unique form, but I don't think a creative staircase is worth $200 million.

I do not want another Bilbao, but I also don't want this chop-job of a project. Mind you, I'm not at all faulting Gehry for this, he had some absolutely tremendous designs, but because of budgetary constraints, he was unable to use any of them.

If the AGO wants a Gehry, they should be willing to pay for it, if they're not, they should get someone else who can make a design that looks cohesive, and ties the entire series of renovations together, while fitting it in under the predetermined budget.

I totally agree. Cohesion is a definite problem. Why even bother with the titanium? It's pretty much just so they can have a standard "Gehry" finish. The interior renderings look nice though.
 
I find his work in wood far more appealing than his work in metal....or at least wood and metal. This probably explains why I like his consumer products much more than his buildings.




















KGB
 
Feb. 7, 2005. 01:00 AM
GTA COLUMNISTS ...
The AGO's troubled times: A chronology


Jan. 17, 2004: AGO security fails as thieves make off with five 18th-century miniature ivory sculptures belonging to benefactor Ken Thomson (worth $1.5 million).

Jan. 28: Celebrated architect Frank Gehry unveils his plan for $195 million re-invention of the AGO, largely bankrolled by Thomson.

Jan. 31: Police recover stolen ivories and Thomson makes emotional statement about what these ivories mean to him.

March 9: Bitter feud revealed as long-time benefactors Joey and Toby Tanenbaum defect from AGO to protest Gehry's "desecration" of Tanenbaum sculpture atrium, plunging gallery into crisis. (CAN'T SAY I BLAME THEM! Freaking stupid to tear down a perfectly fine new addtion!)


May 18: By popular demand AGO reverses decision to put Group of Seven paintings in storage. Among the 50 paintings that go on display is Lawren Harris' "Above Lake Superior" 1922 oil.

May 27: Gehry tweaks design to protect atrium. Tanenbaums return to fold.
(Thank goodness! No doubt saving what is paid for is cheaper -- which, this is Toronto, is CRITICAL!!! What? The feds are going to treat us like Montreal? :lol :lol: )

June: community meetings chaired by city councillor Olivia Chow aim to deal with objections of Grange residents to Gehry project.

August: Gehry delivers final flourishes with billowing new façade for park.

October: City gives zoning approval but opponents vow to take their fight to OMB.

Feb. 4, 2005: On the eve of OMB hearings, AGO makes concessions to neighbourhood rebels, who withdraw objections; hearings cancelled, removing final roadblock to Gehry project.

› Get the NEW Sunday paper! Save 50% now!
FAQs| Site Map| Privacy Policy| Webmaster| Subscribe| My Subscription
Home| GTA| Business| Waymoresports| A&E| Life
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of any material from www.thestar.com is strictly prohibited without the prior written permission of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. For information please contact us using our webmaster form. www.thestar.com online since 1996.
 
Feb. 7, 2005. 09:00 AM
This $250,000 ivory sculpture of English nobleman Charles Mordant, was one of five stolen from the AGO January 17, 2004 and recovered weeks later.
...
AGO emerges from its own annus horribilis — a major theft, upset benefactors, an indifferent public

MARTIN KNELMAN

Late last week the Art Gallery of Ontario may have finally brought an end to one of the wildest, longest and scariest rides any Canadian cultural institution has ever endured.

By quietly settling a dispute with disaffected neighbours on the eve of a showdown at the Ontario Municipal Board, the gallery showed that it has learned how to cut its losses, solve its problems and take a big step toward reaching the glorious future it has been touting.

Even more significantly, it demonstrated that its slogan "Transformation AGO" stands for much more than an architectural makeover. It signals a change of attitude.

Clearly the AGO is following a much different script from the one that led the gallery from one disaster to another early last year.

Twelve months and three weeks ago, on a quiet winter Saturday afternoon, the AGO got off to a rocky start on what soon segued into its Year of Living Dangerously.

Thieves made off with five miniature ivory sculptures valued at $1.5 million and owned by the museum's most important benefactor, Ken Thomson. The incident seemed like the opening scene of a certain kind of movie — an action comedy involving small-time crooks, a billionaire art collector and pratfalls in the higher echelons of the arts world.

As the story unfolded, it began to seem like the dark tale of a major cultural institution going through a crackup in public while enduring one crisis after another — including a dysfunctional board, an alienated staff, angry neighbours, and a disenchanted public.

The timing of last year's theft could not have been worse. It occurred just 11 days before the dramatic moment when the world's most revered architect, Frank Gehry, would return from Los Angeles to the neighbourhood where he grew up (as Frank Goldberg) in the 1930s and 1940s and unveil his dazzling $195 million master plan to reinvent the AGO.

Unfortunately, the man putting up $70 million to make all this possible, as well as donating his $300 million art collection, was in no mood to celebrate. Ken Thomson was so distraught by the theft of his miniature sculptures that a dark cloud seemed to hang over the whole project.

Embarrassing questions were asked. In addition to all its other troubles, did the gallery have a security problem?

Besides, the theft put the spotlight on a lot of messy squabbles within the AGO. An unseemly delay in making public its arrangements with Gehry made it seem as secretive as the Kremlin. That escalated the paranoia level of those who feared Grange Park would be destroyed.

Continuing strife with its own alienated staff was taking a certain toll. There were signs that the AGO board was divided and disengaged. Some accused the AGO of allowing a runaway benefactor, namely Thomson, dictate the future course of what was still, after all, a public institution. In its dealings with the media, the AGO seemed to be constantly on the defensive.

And if the museum had so much trouble managing its affairs, how much worse might things be post-expansion when it was twice as big?

The biggest problem of all was that Torontonians just did not love their art gallery. Possibly because it did not have a record of delivering wildly popular exhibits on a regular basis, the AGO seemed to many people remote and elitist.

Disastrously, in the fall of 2003, the gallery made one of its worst decisions ever. Distracted by its expansion problems and facing attendance and revenue shortfalls in the face of SARS, the museum decided to cut costs by cutting back its operations, and in particular by closing its Canadian gallery where the star attraction was its much-beloved Group of Seven collection.

The result was a public backlash, which, combined with stalling and continuing delays on revealing details of the Gehry project turned the AGO into the problem child of the Toronto arts world — everybody's favourite target.

Thomson cheered up considerably when his ivory sculptures were returned two weeks after their disappearance through a mysterious process that would remain unexplained a year later. (No charges have ever been laid.)

But the AGO was plunged into a more damaging crisis in March when long-time benefactors Joey and Toby Tanenbaum withdrew their support to protest what they described as Gehry's "needless destruction" of the Tanenbaum sculpture atrium. (The only good news from the possible destruction of the sculpture atrium is that it would have provided fuel for the 'Not only do crap Canadian artists and galleries not deserve a penny of tax dollars, art galleries have -as demonstrated by the tearing down of a practically brand new building- a blatant disregard for the hard earned money of salt - of - the earth - factory workers!" etc.,


Next to Thomson, the Tanenbaums were the gallery's most significant benefactors. They had given $93.5 million in cash and art to the gallery. Now they clearly felt they were being shunted aside to serve Thomson's agenda. They were withdrawing their financial support, and Joey Tanenbaum was resigning from the AGO board.

At this point, the AGO's situation looked so bleak it was hard to see how it could raise money and go forward with its Gehry project.

But last spring the AGO began what would turn into a remarkable rehabilitation. First it brought back a significant number of Group of Seven Paintings in time to celebrate Canada Day.

Then came the news that the AGO had settled its differences with the Tanenbaums. Design changes had been made to save their atrium, and they agreed to resume their role as benefactors.

As the summer progressed, there were regular good-news bulletins coming from the Grange. The gallery handled the issues of community residents so well that most of them became supporters of the project. When Gehry revised his plans for the park side of the building, many of them felt their concerns had been addressed. Those who remained opposed were effectively marginalized.

Meanwhile, the AGO had two of its best exhibitions in years — Turner/Whistler/Monet and Modigliani — which gave the public a chance to appreciate the gallery.

And by seizing a number of chances, such as its "Why Art Matters" advertising campaign, the AGO kept coming up with reasons for Toronto to cherish it and feel connected.

The latest sign of recovery came with a last-minute settlement on Friday that pre-empted hearings to unfold all this week at the Bay St. headquarters of the Ontario Municipal Board. Seven unconverted neighbours were challenging the gallery's right to proceed with the Gehry makeover.

The hearings had the ingredients of an action-packed drama that could have been called Last Shootout at the Grange. The gallery would almost certainly have won its battle at the OMB, but had the proceedings dragged on, the result would likely have been negative publicity and ill will in the community.

Instead, the gallery shrewdly gave the remaining dissidents a package of perks and concessions.

And now after a turnaround that ranks somewhere between the unbelievable and the miraculous, the gallery seems confident and capable of achieving a happy ending for an ambitious expansion plan that not so long ago seemed doomed to fail.

Groundbreaking is planned by early summer, with completion set for 2008.

Of course, not all the problems have been solved. In addition to the money committed so far ($70 million from Thomson, $48 million from the federal and provincial governments, and perhaps another $20 million in unannounced gifts from board members and banks) the project could use another $100 million to cover cost overruns, transition funds and an endowment fund for its future.

But there can be no doubt that Transformation AGO is going ahead. There's also no doubt that during its wild ride, this institution has learned a few things about how to win friends and influence people. It has also found ways to embrace Toronto, and make Toronto want to return the hug.

Martin Knelman can be reached at mknelma@thestar.ca

Additional articles by Martin Knelman

› Get the NEW Sunday paper! Save 50% now!
FAQs| Site Map| Privacy Policy| Webmaster| Subscribe| My Subscription
Home| GTA| Business| Waymoresports| A&E| Life
Legal Notice: Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. Distribution, transmission or republication of any material from www.thestar.com is strictly prohibited without the prior written permission of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. For information please contact us using our webmaster form. www.thestar.com online since 1996.
 
1 - 14 of 14 Posts
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Top