adHominem
Senior Member
It saddens me that some people won't be satisfied until they're living in a rendering. All pristine surfaces and manicured lawns. No pesky reminders that life exists outside their bubble: graffiti, factories, poor people.
Bruvyman
Active Member
Noticed last night that the second crane has been completed
Tulse
Senior Member
Redpath needs shipping access, so given the revitalization of the waterfront, that would mean moving Redpath out of Toronto.
Well, it was here first, after all, which makes the argument about "suitability" a bit odd. And while the smell may be problematic (I haven't noticed it being unpleasant when I've briefly visited Sugar Beach), I don't think the visual aspect is necessarily out of keeping -- indeed, Sugar Beach is arguably built with the intention of making the industrial aspect of the waterfront more obvious and accessible, as it "faces" the Redpath dock.
I have no doubt that, at some point, Redpath will move. But in the interim, I'd far prefer seeing some attempt at odour abatement and sprucing up of the structures there rather than wiping it out for yet-more-characterless waterfront condos.
greenleaf
Senior Member
I think it is pretty progressive to keep industrial lands mixed with commercial and residential. It makes for a diverse, unique, dynamic neighbourhood.
Progress is not necessarily demolishing everything for something new. City building is more nuanced than that.
ladyscraper
man alive
I have never heard anyone mention that sugar factory as detrimental to the city's image except for you just now.
However, I've heard many people mention the green glass condos along the waterfront ruining the city's image since they dominate the most famous view of our skyline.
Progress, right?
ahmad.m.atiya
Banned
Many of my colleagues criticize Redpath for its obnoxious smell and even more obnoxious architecture, especially since it is located in such a prime area. On the other hand, while you, a skyscraper enthusiast, might be less than satisfied with the recent condo boom, most other people do view it as progress (and impressive progress at that).
doug
Active Member
How do they feel about the shingle plant further east on lakeshore?
It's a factory, and it's certainly not as obnoxious as those hideous condos surrounding it.
It only became a 'prime area' decades after redpath moved in.
If most people are like you, then I can inderstand this point....doesn't mean any of you are right though.
ahmad.m.atiya
Banned
You raise some really good points, and I can definitely see where you're coming from, Doug. It's just my opinion that the factory no longer belongs in this area, not only because of the rise in land values, but also because of its position between Corus Quay and Pier 27.
adma
Superstar
Even more obnoxious architecture?!?
More obnoxious than this?
or this?
I'd really like to know what your "colleagues" are into, architecturally speaking--or what they *do*, for that matter...
Last edited:
Automation Gallery
Superstar
A sugar plant refinery and museum building on the Toronto waterfront and people want it out...were else anywhere in Toronto can you see an ocean freighter arriving and docking. I say the city should declare this 50 year old plant a heritage site..and who ever does not like it shouldnt live around there.
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=4146#
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redpath_Sugar_Refinery
http://www.shipspotting.com/gallery/photo.php?lid=4146#
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Redpath_Sugar_Refinery
Last edited:
ladyscraper
man alive
I am actually thrilled with many of the condo projects (the ones that have nice designs like ICE or X). I was comparing the Redpath factory to some of the condos on the waterfront though since it's the same general area. Most people would agree that many of those condo buildings along the waterfront are just terrible with no thought going into the design.
I am not against condos in the slightest and I think it's great to have more people wanting to live downtown. However, I don't think buildings that have other uses should automatically be demolished to build more of them.
Rowe
Active Member
This factory won't change a thing. For all we know there could be a functional reason that the factory must stay there. Maybe they aren't getting the price they want for their property yet. Or what if the land is contaminated.. many developers don't want to pay anymore than they need for a piece of land.
It could be 'freshened' up. But there is no need for that now.
Its the same with all the condos going up against the Gardiner. People deal with it or don't live there.
Live in a city, you deal with city life.
It could be 'freshened' up. But there is no need for that now.
Its the same with all the condos going up against the Gardiner. People deal with it or don't live there.
Live in a city, you deal with city life.
Silence&Motion
Senior Member
Most people who think seriously about urban issues tend to see progress as building sustainable, mixed-use neighbourhoods. The only people who see real estate booms as actual progress are those who are more interested in making money in the short term than focusing on the long term issues. Cities have their own ecology and "mono-cropping" is just as bad for urban environments as it is for the natural environment. Economic booms come and go, and forms of urbanization that are profitable today may be undesirable in the future. North American cities turned their waterfronts into exclusive industrial zones in the late 19th century and by the mid 20th century they were almost completely wiped out. Can we really be sure that the types of condos we're building today will actually be desirable spaces in a few decades? The only way to fully avoid this is to make sure our neighbourhoods are diverse so that when some spaces experience busts, others experience booms.
Anyway, this is Waterfront Toronto's philosophy and it is the reason they have been very insistent on keeping light industrial activity around the waterfront.
ahmad.m.atiya
Banned
Even more obnoxious architecture?!?
More obnoxious than this?
or this?
I'd really like to know what your "colleagues" are into, architecturally speaking--or what they *do*, for that matter...
I don't see a problem with either of those developments, especially since they add so much to the community in terms of livelihood. My colleagues are MDs with little architectural knowledge, and therefore represent the general public opinion on this matter.
adma
Superstar
This is getting to be like a Thomas Kinkade fan spouting off in an arts discussion forum...
