I think this argument may take on a different shape if the Distillery District's fate was institutional rather than "touristic", i.e. as an inner-city George Brown campus...
 
Hipster Duck said:
While the distillery district is not a museum, it does preserve a near perfect record of industrial architecture of the period in a campus-like setting. Great industrial architecture from the 19th century is a dime a dozen; several great examples of 19th century industrial architecture that work together as an ensemble is as rare as hen's teeth and, frankly, a glass tower taller than the chimneys that were once the campaniles of this complex ruins that ensemble-like feel.
Click to expand...

... but the ensemble is still there to see and appreciate, and not as some dull-as-dishwater museum but as a successful example of a functioning and thriving heritage site that has been repurposed and reclaimed for ongoing use! The modernist towers are a strong sign of this, as is the Yonge Centre, and along with other elements (hopefully a subway line one day) come together to transform a once dead and isolated ensemble of derelict buildings into a new neighbourhood and tourist site that is being integrated into the city proper.

Hipster Duck said:
To put it in an analogy that modernist sympathizers would begin to understand, this would be like taking a really fine example of lowrise modern campus architecture - say Saarinen's GM technical center in Warren, MI or Ron Thom's Trent University - and building some sort of PoMo highrise of 50 storeys smack dab in the center of it. Would this ruin the striking beauty of these ensembles? Absolutely.
Click to expand...

I get your point but I don't know that this is apples to apples. Not every combination is a winner and the modernist/pomo contrast you suggest just doesn't seem to have enough tension. The modernist/Victorian or modernist/industrial marriage that we see repeating itself so successfully all over Toronto does seem to work well, and the Distillery is just another stunning example why.

One thing I feel would be an asset at the Distillery is more historic/interprative plaques and markers and perhaps the setting aside of one of the more significant groupings of buildings as a museum to the site and its history.
 
Tewder said:
One thing I feel would be an asset at the Distillery is more historic/interprative plaques and markers and perhaps the setting aside of one of the more significant groupings of buildings as a museum to the site and its history.
Click to expand...

Perhaps an alcohol museum?
 
The problem, if it can be called that, is a financial one. The public doesn't want to dole the money out to keep the site in a pristine form and the price for private sector involvement (thus saving the site as a whole from destruction by neglect) are 3 glass towers. The result: not ideal like preservation as is, but at least you'd gained 1. private sector money, 2. residents at the site, 3. some decent modern architecture and 4. original adaptive reuse. I can think of far worse outcomes than this (e.g. Brantford).

AoD
 
I am surprised at how busy it has become during the day. I was there this morning at 11:00 to see what lileo has on sale and the Distillery appears to be a stopping point and attraction for a number of tourist groups, like the Galleria at Brookfield Place.
 
... and what a nice complement it will make to a revitalized St. Lawrence Market. Olde Town Toronto will soon have a couple of very strong anchor attractions.
 
... and I've noticed more people strolling west from the Distillery, crossing Parliament, and on to the Esplanade than in the past. We shouldn't fall into the trap of always measuring the merit of a neighbourhood by how much retail it offers - and the Esplanade offers a limited amount on the north side only - and I have high hopes that this broad, green, thoroughfare will eventually come into its own as a popular pedestrian route linking the Distillery and points east to the Market, the downtown core, and the new waterfront that's reached by heading south on Jarvis.
 
Tewder said:
There are different ways to respect history. US has done a far better job than I could of describing how these buildings do respect their surroundings despite rising above them too...

I'm okay with this. The intent behind the revival of the Distillery was never to create a museum. The vision was to 'revitalize' a collection of heritage structures, creating a living and thriving District through the arts, design, entrepreneurship and residential etc. They have done this, and very successfully. The modern towers are just as much a part of the identity of this rising new neighbourhood as the original distillery buildings. Taken each on their own they have very different things to offer than when taken together as a symbol of a city that does indeed respect heritage while recognizing how vital it is to continue to create, to reinterpret, and to redefine urban spaces and the public realm. In this sense I don't see a huge difference between the Distillery and the continually evolving St. Lawrence market area.
Click to expand...

Who suggested they create a museum? There are many vibrant districts around the world that consist almost entirely of historical structures or a respectful mix of the old and new.

This false choice is always presented - either we get these towers or the district remains some sort of poorly attended museum. There's no room in the middle.
 
Urban Shocker said:
Again, more scaremongering false choices - neither based on the sort of design excellence that the Distillery District represents. And nowhere near as likely to happen as the "Walnut Hall" demolition-by-neglect scenario which might have overtaken the Gooderham & Worts complex which I suggested earlier.

Nicely put, Tewder and greenleaf.
Click to expand...

Yes, perhaps if you edit out the rest of my post - which is exactly what you did.
 
syn said:
Yes, perhaps if you edit out the rest of my post - which is exactly what you did.
Click to expand...

Absurd, even nightmarish, counter-proposals - having nothing to do with what has actually taken place with the revival of the Distillery District - were the essence of your post, and they were quoted corerectly.
 
syn said:
Who suggested they create a museum? There are many vibrant districts around the world that consist almost entirely of historical structures or a respectful mix of the old and new.

This false choice is always presented - either we get these towers or the district remains some sort of poorly attended museum. There's no room in the middle.
Click to expand...

To put it differently then, low rise would be fine too but this doesn't preclude me from liking - indeed preferring - the high rises we are getting here and for all the reasons stated. My 'museum' comments were more a response to the 'towers in Fort York/heritage ensemble' analogies or the notion that towers here are somehow disrespectful which I do not find them to be.
 
syn said:
The point here is that these developments do not respect the history the Distillery represents through its built form.
Click to expand...

The built form of the Distillery used to include rows of homes for the workers until they were demolished as the distillery expanded. And there used to be a residence for one of the first owners of the distillery, located more or less where the first of the condo towers now stands. Restoring residential use to the site strikes me as perfectly respectful to history.
 
Urban Shocker said:
The built form of the Distillery used to include rows of homes for the workers until they were demolished as the distillery expanded. And there used to be a residence for one of the first owners of the distillery, located more or less where the first of the condo towers now stands. Restoring residential use to the site strikes me as perfectly respectful to history.
Click to expand...

As some of us have stated many, many times, the issue isn't with having residents in the Distillery; it's with the built form of the projects.

I think it's time to revisit putting a 45 storey Clewes condo in a nice, residential Riverdale neighbourhood. That would be perfectly respectful to the current and historical use of the site as a residential area.
 
Though, since the new Distillery buildings work so well with the heritage buildings, the "issue" lies with you rather than with the project.

Attempting to link the Distillery with other parts of town that have nothing to do with it again, are we?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top