Toronto Bathurst Quay Revitalization | ?m | 2s | City of Toronto | Kearns Mancini

Just to add some clarity to this discussion. This proposal is not real. It is the work of an Architecture student in Austria as part of his thesis (don't know why he chose these silos). The chances of this being built are next to nil. Yes, it is a very radical design but you have to give this young student credit for having imagination, something that too many of our own much vaunted local architects - such as Diamond & Schmidt, sorely lack.

The current plan is to try to sell the parcel of land west of the silo's to a developer, either for condos or offices and use some of the proceeds to carry out the necessary work to stabilize this structure. I would think having an obstruction like this on the eastern side of this parcel of land will diminish its value greatly. There could very well be a showdown between Ford and supporters of retaining the Silos once the new administration realize how much it will cost the city to preserve this unremarkable structure.
 
Peepers said:
The current plan is to try to sell the parcel of land west of the silo's to a developer, either for condos or offices and use some of the proceeds to carry out the necessary work to stabilize this structure.
Click to expand...

Shame..truthfully the only developer i would trust down there would be Cityzen to do something half decent...maybe even build something similar to Pier 27 and incorporate the silos and greenspace into some type of venue.
 
Peepers said:
The current plan is to try to sell the parcel of land west of the silo's to a developer, either for condos or offices and use some of the proceeds to carry out the necessary work to stabilize this structure. I would think having an obstruction like this on the eastern side of this parcel of land will diminish its value greatly. There could very well be a showdown between Ford and supporters of retaining the Silos once the new administration realize how much it will cost the city to preserve this unremarkable structure.
Click to expand...

I'd say that in their current context of bourgeois condos and highly manicured parks, the silos are quite bold structures, strong reminders of a radically different past to the area, perhaps one whose significance is poorly understood in this city. Nonetheless, the architectural diversity they bring to the area is fantastic. Silos like those are only going to get rarer.

If they were unremarkable, they probably would have been demolished a long time ago. Instead, Toronto's fondness for the structures was formalized in 1973 with heritage designation.
 
junctionist said:
If they were unremarkable, they probably would have been demolished a long time ago. Instead, Toronto's fondness for the structures was formalized in 1973 with heritage designation.
Click to expand...

Well, yeah, then stop the heritage gravy train;-)

(not my opinion)
 
junctionist said:
I'd say that in their current context of bourgeois condos and highly manicured parks, the silos are quite bold structures, strong reminders of a radically different past to the area, perhaps one whose significance is poorly understood in this city. Nonetheless, the architectural diversity they bring to the area is fantastic. Silos like those are only going to get rarer.

If they were unremarkable, they probably would have been demolished a long time ago. Instead, Toronto's fondness for the structures was formalized in 1973 with heritage designation.
Click to expand...

With all due respect (and I mean that), do we truly need to preserve reminders of a radically different past when the structures are so ugly (imo) and no longer operating for their intended use. I don't disagree that they are bold structures, but the aesthete in me cringes every time my eyes set sight on them in the context of the city's waterfront evolution. I am capable of appreciating the rare and the diverse, but when it comes to these silos, I just can't help but wish they had been demolished long ago (with prior thorough documentation for the city's historical archives, of course). Just my opinion.
 
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". In any case, I think it is important to preserve our industrial heritage -- it gives a texture and sense of history to a location, especially one with such a mass of newer development like the waterfront. These kind of buildings give the site a past, and connect us with the overall history of the city. They make the space more than just of the moment.

Of course, I love industrial architecture in general, so perhaps I'm biased.
 
^ Agreed. There's no point of ignoring the history of this city and what it's main purpose and industry was.. it was an industrial city and the industrial structures should be maintained. I bet many people thought restoring the industrial buildings in the Distillery district was a waste of money, and they're ugly and whatnot.. but imagine the city without them.. We could demolish the silos today and in 50 years people are amazed that we did, same way we are amazed that Nathan Phillips and the Torontonians of the 60's could tear down the Armouries, or the old Toronto Star Building. These are a part of our history and it would be of no gain to ignore it or them, or try to sweep it under the rug and say we were always a beautiful, aesthetic city. With a good job of restoring them and proper way of including them in the future of Toronto's waterfront, we could make it aesthetically pleasing, while being aware and proud of our history as an industrial city..
 
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". In any case, I think it is important to preserve our industrial heritage -- it gives a texture and sense of history to a location, especially one with such a mass of newer development like the waterfront. These kind of buildings give the site a past, and connect us with the overall history of the city. They make the space more than just of the moment.

Of course, I love industrial architecture in general, so perhaps I'm biased.
Click to expand...
I live in the area, and I totally agree with you. It definitely gives me a sense of connection to the waterfront's history. I would hate to see the silos go.
 
Well, I knew that comment would generate disagreement, and I respect your views. Tulse, perhaps if they could be integrated into some new development, rather than remain in their current state of disrepair, I might reconsider my point of view. Pink Lucy, I do understand the desire to preserve a sense of history, and The Architect, I agree Toronto should be proud of its industrial past. However, I don't think any of you would suggest that we preserve absolutely everything from the past and not move on to reflect what Toronto also is becoming and will become in future. How do we pick and choose what is valuable enough for preservation, that is a question I grapple with. In any event, they've been declared heritage, so I'll just avert my gaze for now and hope that they are somehow successfully integrated in the future.
 
Last edited:
I agree, I don't think we should preserve everything, but the silos are pretty much the last historical structure on the waterfront west of Yonge (I can't think of any others at the moment) and tearing them down would mean the area would be all about the new without a place to remember the old. If there were a bunch of stuff to pick and choose from, maybe I'd choose something else. They've never bothered me in the least, and I've always thought they've added something to the area as a whole. However, I know a lot of my neighbours who are in favour of getting rid of them.
 
I personally think that if only one silo structure were to be saved and restored, it should be the Victory Soya Mills silos on the east end of the Harbour, which are still intact and in fairly good condition. Their location near the waterfront is also a plus, as they would make a good centre piece of a cultural project of some sort. And since so much less money would be required to restore them than it would take to restore even a portion of the Canada Malting silos to a safe condition, more money would be available for the cultural project itself.
 
Mongo said:
I personally think that if only one silo structure were to be saved and restored, it should be the Victory Soya Mills silos on the east end of the Harbour, which are still intact and in fairly good condition. Their location near the waterfront is also a plus, as they would make a good centre piece of a cultural project of some sort. And since so much less money would be required to restore them than it would take to restore even a portion of the Canada Malting silos to a safe condition, more money would be available for the cultural project itself.
Click to expand...

Fortunately, we have two sets of silos on both ends of the downtown waterfront in two different neighbourhoods, so there's no need to consider only keeping one. The Malting Plant has the more unusual narrow and tall structure that has Canada Malting painted on giving it so much more character. It's the more historic site of the two.

Both sites have the open space for a new development.
 
junctionist said:
Fortunately, we have two sets of silos on both ends of the downtown waterfront in two different neighbourhoods, so there's no need to consider only keeping one. The Malting Plant has the more unusual narrow and tall structure that has Canada Malting painted on giving it so much more character. It's the more historic site of the two.

Both sites have the open space for a new development.
Click to expand...

Yeah..but isnt the Victory Soya Mills silos owned by a private developer that pretty well wants to erase them out of his plans..:confused:
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top