Tulse said:
The structures' aesthetics are significantly affected by their disuse and decay -- if they were maintained, and perhaps integrated into some other, new development, you might not see them as "ugly".
Of course, I love industrial architecture in general, so perhaps I'm biased.
Click to expand...

Actually I think that it is precisely the decay of this structure that makes it attractive to many, including me. I have said that I think the structure is unremarkable but I don't believe that it is ugly. I also have an appreciation for industrial architecture and can find beauty in architectural ruins that we see in places such as Detroit. If these silos were patched up and given a fresh coat of paint I doubt many people would be in favour of maintaining them on this site.

It would be nice if it could be preserved in some kind of iconic structure like the one presented above but for practical reasons I can't see that happening unless some wealthy benefactor steps forward. As it stands the lands west of the silos are to be sold off with some of the proceeds going to stabilizing the structure. The very presence of the silos on this parcel of land will limit how much the city will get for the sale. Any way you look at it the city will be spending millions to preserve them. There are probably hundreds of heritage structures in the city in need of repair that could make better use of this money.
 
Peepers said:
Actually I think that it is precisely the decay of this structure that makes it attractive to many, including me. I have said that I think the structure is unremarkable but I don't believe that it is ugly. I also have an appreciation for industrial architecture and can find beauty in architectural ruins that we see in places such as Detroit. If these silos were patched up and given a fresh coat of paint I doubt many people would be in favour of maintaining them on this site.

It would be nice if it could be preserved in some kind of iconic structure like the one presented above but for practical reasons I can't see that happening unless some wealthy benefactor steps forward. As it stands the lands west of the silos are to be sold off with some of the proceeds going to stabilizing the structure. The very presence of the silos on this parcel of land will limit how much the city will get for the sale. Any way you look at it the city will be spending millions to preserve them. There are probably hundreds of heritage structures in the city in need of repair that could make better use of this money.
Click to expand...

The silos are prominently-located waterfront heritage that are in the city's hands. They're landmarks. If restored, they would still be attractive. Don't we want the best waterfront we can have, one not only with attractive public spaces and contemporary development, but one with striking historic landmarks preserved? The city can't just wash its hands of them because of inconvenience.
 
Maybe KPMB could pretty them up ... by randomly punching through a few tall, slitty, Munk-y business windows here and there?
 
Urban Shocker said:
Maybe KPMB could pretty them up ... by randomly punching through a few tall, slitty, Munk-y business windows here and there?
Click to expand...

I think the challenge of reusing the silos invites more experimental approaches that might be completely inappropriate on more conventional heritage buildings.
 
Indeed - hence my suggestion. More like KPMB's slitty Lightbox treatment, with ever-changing colour shining through, than their manqué Munk-y mode.
 
Jan 19
5373328292_366a2584fd_b.jpg


5372728169_fa826075da_b.jpg


5372725129_0e2c70f841_b.jpg


5372724163_0dcdf2e052_b.jpg
 
Thanks, though is it just my computer here at work or are those pics a bit magenta?

I would be happy to post some desktop sized versions tonight, but the second photo is VERY noisy and needs some work (hence why I intentionally left it small)
 
indeed, sweet pics and I dont notice any magenta issue. the photos are definitely warm and look as if you may have had your white balance set to "cloudy", which it was.
 
Yes it was cloudy, but it was also 2:00am with a lot of mixed lighting sources which is why I had white balance on "auto". Looks like it is just my monitor here at work, because at home it looks fine (though a bit warm like you said)

Thanks forthe kind words. BlogTO published the first photo in their Morning Brew article on Tuesday which was nice.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top