Toronto Clear Spirit | 131.36m | 40s | Cityscape | a—A

[p5archit]

Distillery District-towers

Isn't the Distillery Dist., supposed to be a site where heritage takes precedent? This is not London, where we have an abundance of heritage buildings, streets, or swaths of old buildings where the old and new can and sometimes must co-exist.

There seems to be a common misconception that Toronto can only create higher densities by building point towers- I like intensification and the are could definitely use it, but staggered low rise-buildings would fit the area better than some monstrous towers.

p5

 

[circuitboy84]

Re: Distillery District-towers

"Since then it's been the top location for film shoots. It wasn't just sitting there rotting."


Film productions generally do not leave a location in better shape than what it was found. Secondly, they do not do restorative maintenance on buildings they shoot in. If the only human activity occuring in the area was film shoots I can pretty well guarantee you that these buildings were being neglected. Thirteen years may not seem like a long time, but many of the buildings were not in use for longer than that. Furthermore, a lot of rotting and decay can occur in poorly insulated buildings that are built primarily from brick and wood.

 

[SD2]

Re: Distillery District-towers

Film productions generally do not leave a location in better shape than what it was found. Secondly, they do not do restorative maintenance on buildings they shoot in. If the only human activity occuring in the area was film shoots I can pretty well guarantee you that these buildings were being neglected. Thirteen years may not seem like a long time, but many of the buildings were not in use for longer than that. Furthermore, a lot of rotting and decay can occur in poorly insulated buildings that are built primarily from brick and wood.

That's fair enough, but the fact that Cityscape has restored it as a nice historical district shouldn't give them the right to develop whatever they want in the area.

 

[adma]

Re: Distillery District-towers

There seems to be a common misconception that Toronto can only create higher densities by building point towers- I like intensification and the are could definitely use it, but staggered low rise-buildings would fit the area better than some monstrous towers.

And as so many in this thread are overlooking, there's staggered-low-rise area precedent, from the St. Lawrence Neighbourhood to Mozo...

 

[Jarrek]

Re: Distillery District-towers

I have no problem with Cityscape trying to make money. That doesn't mean they should be allowed to build whatever they want there. The city routinely will turn down applications for development for a variety of reasons. We don't have many continuous historical districts...why drop huge point towers in this one? Surely the city could've asked for more restrained development and offered the developer some perks.

Spot on. Well said.

It doesn't take much to figure out that these two towers will not fit into the area at all. The developer is obviously capitalizing on the trendiness of the area in order to build multi-million dollar conods. I'm sure it could have been done some other way.

Thank God the French figured it out after building the Tour Montparnasse. All high-rise development in the city centre was banned. Most of Paris' high-rises are in La Defense.

 

[istrian]

Re: Distillery District-towers

Once upon a time Manhattan and King-Kong (SIC) were
lowrise heaven.
People don't like changes, that's all. Question of inertion !
Thus, there will always be someone who will oppose to highrises only because their neighborhood jet don't have
them...until somebody enough powerfull (financially and politically) decides to change that status, making the
area scraper jungle ?!?

Nimbys and people like them made urban sprawl our reality
>: >: >: :evil :evil :evil >: >: >:

 

[SD2]

Re: Distillery District-towers

Once upon a time Manhattan and King-Kong (SIC) were
lowrise heaven.
People don't like changes, that's all. Question of inertion !
Thus, there will olways be someone who will oppose to highrises only because their neighborhood jet don't have
them...until somebody enough powerfull (financially and politically) decides to change that status, making the
area scraper jungle ?!?

Nimbys and people like them made urban sprawl our reality
>: >: >: :evil :evil :evil >: >: >:

As it's been pointed out, skyscrapers aren't the only way to add density, nor are they appropriate for any area. I don't oppose development in this location, just the kind of development they're proposing which is totally out of scale.

 

[andreapalladio]

Re: Distillery District-towers

Gentlemen, I give you NIDBYism: Not In the Distillery's Backyard.

 

[spmarshall]

Re: Distillery District-towers

Gentlemen, I give you NIDBYism: Not In the Distillery's Backyard.

Reductionist argument at its best!

Also, never understimate the power of bad grammar, spelling errors and repeating emoticons!

 

[alklay]

Re: Distillery District-towers

Tall buildings do not equal density. You can have incredible density with streets filled with 8 story buildings.

 

[Bogtrotter]

Re: Distillery District-towers

For me it's ultimately good design that is most important. I'd rather see a well designed point tower next to the Distillery than a poorly designed midrise- and vice versa.

 

[SD2]

Re: Distillery District-towers

For me it's ultimately good design that is most important. I'd rather see a well designed point tower next to the Distillery than a poorly designed midrise- and vice versa.

Isn't context important too? The tower may be a good design on it's own, but in the context of the Distillery it doesn't necessarily work.

I'd rather we have some well designed mid-rise buildings in the area - I don't think it's only a choice between well designed point towers and badly designed midrises.

 

[AndrewJM3D]

Re: Distillery District-towers

I think we should give Cityscape the benefit of the doubt here. They've proven to us through their actions that they want to do what's best for the distillery. They've brought it back from an industrial wasteland into what will be one of Toronto's best cultural districts. They've refused name brand chains from leasing space in the area allowing smaller local businesses to set up shop. They've payed attention to details and restored all the buildings back to there former glory. I'm sure they're not about to make a mistake with a few point towers and undo all they have worked so hard for.

We shouldn't be overly concerned with scale of buildings around the perimeter of the distillery providing the design is of high quality. As both Ed and Jarrek have shown in the images they posted it can or cannot be good choice for a district like this. I say lets see a few renders a read more about the design and materials before we jump all over Cityscape.

 

[Bogtrotter]

Re: Distillery District-towers

I guess this is where a planning dept with teeth would come in handy. I think ultimately some parcels in that area are probably suitable for higher buildings. But i would agree in that I would have preferred to see a well-designed low or midsized building directly adjacent to the Distillery property.

 

[Brighter Hell]

Re: Distillery District-towers

I had a look at some of the planning documents for this area. There's some pretty clear wording with regard to buliding height.

From the King-Parliament Secondary Plan:

10.6 (a) talks about scale of development. New buildings are permitted if: "the scale of the new mixed use development is consistent with the height limits for such lands and is compatible with the heights generally found within neighbouring portions of the St. Lawrence community;"

10.11.4 In order to assist the achievement of the full implementation of the policies of this Plan for Regeneration Area 'B', the contributions to one or more community benefits in Regeneration Area 'B' may be requested in exchange for a height increase above the height limit, provided that the increase in height is appropriate, the community benefit enhances Regeneration Area 'B' and the benefit is secured through an appropriate legal agreement between the owner and the City of Toronto.

3.2 (e) new buildings will achieve a compatible relationship with their built form context through consideration of
such matters as building height, massing, scale, setbacks, stepbacks, roof line and profile and architectural character and expression;

From the West Don Lands Precinct Plan:

"The scale and grain of the buildings and spaces of the Distillery District Neighbourhood will extend into the West Don Lands, shaping both proposed buildings and public spaces in the immediate vicinity east of the Distillery."

One weird thing I noticed is that this part of Mill St is considered part of the Distillery District in the West Don Lands Plan but not in the Secondary Plan. Even so, the wording in the Secondary Plan is pretty clear.