Lost Toronto

[Urban Shocker]

You're welcome.

 

[adma]

I thought KTKTKT was what this dude was going on about

 

[egotrippin]

It's funny looking at historic photos of Toronto. Despite the fact that our population has increased dramatically, the city seems so much livelier with pedestrian activity and from a street view the city seems a lot denser. There was a much better streetwall and pedestrian involvement on the streets, and I guess that's what I sometimes find lacking nowadays. Too many surface lots and pointless empty space.

 

[adma]

Well, what can you do. That was also an era before TV, computers, and other indoor-confinement distractions

 

[TKTKTK]

We should also consider a lot of those old photos as "best snap shots ever". They aren't necessarily telling a universal truth about toronto back then, rather they're showing a story we quite like (and so we've kept them).

As busy as those photos show the city, can you imagine how quiet it must have been downtown on a weeknight? Or heck, a sunday afternoon?

 

[toraerach]

I'm a little conflicted about all of this. I mean, were most of these buildings designed to last? I'd imagine a lot of them would've had to have been knocked down by now anyway.

Old Montreal didn't survive through some sort of preservationist effort. It was really more of an accident. The financial sector moved, and the area went into decay for a good while. I'm guessing there wasn't any development there because no one thought it would be worth it.

Now I'm not saying Toronto is anything like Paris architectually (God I wish), but before the Paris we see now was built, the entire medieval city had to be destroyed. Very little remains from medieval Paris (I think there's one house left somewhere). The point is that even though we've lost a good chunk of our city's historical buildings, we are not alone. It does not prevent us from from building a new beautiful city.

I think I heard somewhere that, after Boston, Toronto has the most preserved Victorian houses in North America. That's certainly something to be proud of. There are a lot of historic buildings we should be proud of. The Royal York, I believe, was once the tallest building in the British Empire. It'll be sad when the condos on the waterfront completely block it from the skyline, but it will still be there. Humber's Lakeshore campus is absolutely beautiful.

You also have to realize that cities very rarely can maintain their historical buildings. If you want to see beautiful 100 year old + architecture, there are amazing areas just outside of the area. Downtown Oakville, for one, has been excellently preserved. Or come out to rural areas. Some villages less than an hour and a half from Toronto have barely changed. To go back to the Paris example, to see medieval France, you go to the towns and villages, not the big cities.

If you look at a city and see only what is lost, you'll never really be able to see what it could be.

 

[adma]

Yet, why isn't Paris ripping down its Haussman-era neighbourhoods on behalf of the ultra-contemporary? Even Haussman wouldn't get away with his interventions today, because of the historical ordinances, community organizations, and political cultures in place. And whatever *is* left of medieval Paris tends to be prized and preserved, not arbitrarily sacrificed on behalf of a "new beautiful city"--that is, even Paris is no longer the Paris that you're portraying.

If you want to see beautiful 100 year old + architecture, there are amazing areas just outside of the area. Downtown Oakville, for one, has been excellently preserved. Or come out to rural areas. Some villages less than an hour and a half from Toronto have barely changed. To go back to the Paris example, to see medieval France, you go to the towns and villages, not the big cities.

If it's all about that kind of insipid, drecky spirit, then one might as well rip down Downtown Oakville and the towns and villages of France, as well.

Besides...

...the laments haven't been just about "beautiful 100 year old + architecture".

 

[toraerach]

Yet, why isn't Paris ripping down its Haussman-era neighbourhoods on behalf of the ultra-contemporary? Even Haussman wouldn't get away with his interventions today, because of the historical ordinances, community organizations, and political cultures in place. And whatever *is* left of medieval Paris tends to be prized and preserved, not arbitrarily sacrificed on behalf of a "new beautiful city"--that is, even Paris is no longer the Paris that you're portraying.

I'm not saying Paris is still like that. I'm saying that just because a city destroys most of its older buildings, the city has not lost any chance to be beautiful. I'm saying that even if Toronto does destroy all of its historic buildings (which I would not be happy with), we shouldn't just give up on it as a lost cause. I mean, whining about how things could have been won't do anything.

Paris is proud of itself, Toronto isn't. That's the difference. You need to change that before you can get people to care about historic sites and invest in beautiful new projects. People need to be able to expect more from their city.

And I was just pointing out that there are well preserved areas in the GTA. Oakville's preservationists have been active since the end of WWII. From what I know about the program there, it is very sophisticated. People in downtown Oakville are proud of the history there. It's a lot easier to be proud when there's a plaque on every house saying when and by whom it was built and what their profession was. You don't get that in Toronto.

Toronto needs stronger rules about historic buildings, but I don't think the average person actually cares that much. People know that whatever development they're trying to stop will probably go through anyway, so they don't even try anymore. I can't say I blame them. Most of the time, stuff like this is a loosing battle.

 

[ganjavih]

Paris is proud of itself, Toronto isn't. That's the difference. You need to change that before you can get people to care about historic sites and invest in beautiful new projects.

I think part of the reason Torontonians aren't as proud as they could be is because we've destroyed so much of the historic beauty we once had. I love Toronto but it isn't a beautiful city. I think we'd be a lot prouder if we still had the grand streets we once had.

 

[syn]

I think Torontonians are proud, but the loss of history is certainly depressing. No matter how often I look at pictures like this I can't believe so much of it was destroyed. The Postal Building on Toronto Street was beautiful.

 

[adma]

Paris is proud of itself, Toronto isn't. That's the difference. You need to change that before you can get people to care about historic sites and invest in beautiful new projects. People need to be able to expect more from their city.

And I was just pointing out that there are well preserved areas in the GTA. Oakville's preservationists have been active since the end of WWII. From what I know about the program there, it is very sophisticated. People in downtown Oakville are proud of the history there. It's a lot easier to be proud when there's a plaque on every house saying when and by whom it was built and what their profession was. You don't get that in Toronto.

Well, I think there's a subtler pride in place in Toronto--one that might view the Oakville model (let alone the Unionville model) as excessively genteel and reactionary.

Nor would an Oakville model necessarily address this.

 

[TKTKTK]

Mason & Risch Building, 1919 (Shuter & Yonge). Also note the HydroElectric Shop next door.

Lane running North from Queen Street, and the Mason & Risch building's backside in 1942. Interesting in that this is pretty much where the EC Galleria is now. Did Zeidler mean to reference the old alley's fire escapes and steam pipes? Probably not.

Anyway. Back to the Mason & Risch building, by 1949 it was Clayton's:

 

[CityPlaceN1]

Nice shot of the subway being built.