Toronto Bridgepoint Hospital | 61.87m | 10s | Bridgepoint Health | Diamond Schmitt

From CBC.ca

Council approves Riverdale demolition
Last updated Jan 31 2006 03:26 PM EST
CBC News


Over the objections of heritage groups, city councillors unanimously approved a plan Tuesday to tear down the former Riverdale hospital.

Opponents of the plan say the semi-circular design of the 1960s-era building makes it historically significant.

They argue that a new hospital could be built on the site without tearing down the original building.

"I would like to point out that both these buildings do fit on this site, in the present scheme," said architect Jane Burgess.

But site operator Bridgeport Health told the city that it would only build a new facility at the location if the old building were removed.

"They have concluded that the new hospital's functions would be compromised by maintaining the half-round building," said Coun. Paula Fletcher, whose ward includes the hospital site at Broadview Avenue and Gerrard Street East.

Burgess said Tuesday's decision to tear down a landmark building would be a great loss to the city.

She says the council could have done more to save it by finding other uses for the building.

Heritage groups are now considering whether to appeal the decision to the Ontario Municipal Board.
 
I'm not sure this city will ever learn.

Was it really unanimous?
 
In case anyone's interested (I haven't the time or on-line subscription to search), there's a piece by John Geiger in today's National Post slamming *all* modernist preservation, with an accompanying pic of Riverdale Hospital. And it's the sort of thing that makes Terence Corcoran look like Phyllis Lambert. Really. It's almost more worthy of past Peter Worthington-sponsored shibboleths on behalf of the McMichaels in the Sun...
 
Tear them down
John Geiger
National Post

There is a delightful irony in the fact that advocates for modernist architecture are having to band together to save examples of it from the wrecking ball. The architects of these buildings themselves had no compunction about remaking the face of cities, razing historic streetscapes to make way for their glass and concrete erections. They never cared for the wishes of ordinary people. Believing they had a monopoly on taste, they forced their will and their often brutal vision on communities. Now, 50 years on, their "modernist" buildings have in turn become old-fashioned. They have reached a critical stage in their lives, and must either be lovingly restored at great cost, or demolished. People are being rallied to protect the glass and concrete stumps. It is a call that is being greeted, understandably, with indifference. Or worse: with an austere visage much like the one the buildings themselves project.

To fight to save a building, people have to care about it, and to care about it, they have to like it. That's the problem the clique of modernist preservationists have to confront: Nobody likes what they are determined to save. On the contrary, I suspect most people, if asked, would be shocked by the suggestion that the remaining extant examples of modernism have any historical or, for that matter, architectural value. The buildings are certainly not liked, but interestingly, they are not loathed either, any more than the air-conditioning units they resemble are loathed. They are simply there. This detachment was intentional, cultivated by modernist practitioners whose designs were meant to be alien, the product of an aesthetic scam called the "International Style."

So, one by one, they come down. Edmonton City Hall, hailed as having brought "International Style to the Alberta capital," opened in 1957, was gone a mere 40 years later without a single preservationist placard in sight. In Toronto, the Union Carbide Building, completed in 1961 and once called "as fine an example of the International Style as we have," was razed in 1998, again without a whimper of protest. Ditto Terminal One at Pearson International Airport. The same pattern has been repeated in cities across the country. Harold Kalman's A History of Canadian Architecture, Volume II, has a chapter entitled "Modern Architecture and Beyond," filled with images of these bleak landmarks. Kalman's book will soon be about the only place you will be able to see them -- that is, if you are strange enough to want to look.

In Toronto, there is a belated attempt by a small group of preservationists to rally public opinion. It is too late, they calculate, to save Inn on the Park, an example of architect Peter Dickinson's peculiarly grim brand of Internationalist design. Dickinson is singlehandedly responsible for dozens of truly hideous buildings, mostly in Toronto but also in Ottawa and Montreal, including the aptly named Continental Can Building. (He is the subject of an online archive that celebrates his contribution to the ruination of urban Canada. If you have a moment, it is worth a look, but not before breakfast: www.dominionmodern.ca/ dickinson/index.html.)

Toronto's modernist lovers instead have been devoting their efforts to save the former Riverdale Hospital, shown on this page. They suffered a setback last week when city council voted unanimously to approve a plan to demolish it. The preservationists are quoted in various news reports speaking in reverential tones about the old hospital's "beautiful" curving structure, and the concrete "mushrooms" that have the appearance of having sprung up around it. But we all know what makes for the most fertile soil for mushrooms. Another one bites the dust.

jgeiger@nationalpost.com
 
Interestingly, the author omitted examples such as Toronto City Hall and TD Centre at home and quite a few others abroad. So much for the universal indifference about Modern architecture.

AoD
 
Well, I'm sympathetic to the article. To me the modern era was about disregard for the street and surroundings, disregard for heritage and lots and lots of parking lots. Of course there are good examples of modernism but frankly most of them can go **ducks**. I also agree that a lot of Dickinson's work are eyesores... particularly that grim beast at Bay and College. One of the ugliest buildings in the city, IMO.
 
Ganja, you're sticking up for the architectural-commentary equivalent of those old jaw-dropping "Felix Holtmann" silent-majority shibboleths against meat dresses and colour-field abstraction. Y'know, "I may not know architecture, but I know what I like".

Not that Canuck-modernism's hagiographers can't use such commentary, at least as a scare-silly reminder of the philistines out there...
 
adma:

You've used the word "shibboleth" twice already in this thread. Once more and a yellow card may be shown.

ganjavih:

I'm shocked! The modern era may have resulted in some of those things, but it wasn't "about" them, surely?
 
Every era turns on particular styles of architecture, go back 50 years and you can read exactly this kind of diatribe - about Victorian rowhouses. Go back to 1910 and read what they had to say about Second Empire or Romanesque buildings - same thing. In 2050 they will be wanting to rip some of our treasures of today.
 
It's true, I resent the modern era and what it did to cities, not only Toronto. I know it's not a popular view here, but it is my opinion.

Beavis.gif
 
ganja:

A lot of what the Modern era did to cities wasn't architecture per se - but Modern planning. Sure we lost a good number of fine historical buildings to Modernist pieces of questionable aesthetic value, but the real "crime" is elimination of extant urban fabric at the time.

AoD
 
Compare and contrast with this ReadingToronto article, originally from the Post:

A Return to Modernity

The ultimate winner of Mississauga’s Absolute condominium design competition must be an international icon, insist clients Fernbrook Homes and Cityzen Developments. The six semifinalists selected last week suggest that they will get their wish.

The Toronto region’s recent condominium boom is driving a demand for high-design not seen for two generations. Good design is, however, more than stylishly iconic buildings. To be successful in the long term, quality buildings - especially residences – have to be as functional as they are beautiful.

Toronto’s modernist epoch of the 50s and 60s gave the city many of its most ambitious, stylish, and successful buildings.

The best architecture of this era incorporates rich materials, complex spatial forms, and a deep concern for the way occupants live – all hallmarks of modernity. Those lucky enough to inhabit these buildings appreciate amenities not found in architecture that is more prosaic and less considered. In many ways, the design of these buildings represents a heroic belief that good architecture is an essential part of living well.

Older modernist inspired apartments and condominiums dot Toronto’s landscape. Peter Dickinson’s One Benvenuto Place, for example, accents the crest of Avenue Road. Built in 1955, it is aging well. In fact, design elements used here find new life in the latest generation of the city’s modernism influenced condominiums.

Toronto’s current condo boom is turning out to be a modernist renaissance, especially in the city’s urban core. Today’s style-conscious condominium buyers have rediscovered that the architecture they inhabit can either enhance or diminish the quality of their lives.

A small, local company is adding well-considered, innovative projects to Toronto’s growing pool of modernist inspired buildings. Founded in 1998 by Howard Cohen and Stephen Gross, Context Development’s mission to offer the condominium market well designed, modern architecture has proven to be a timely strategy. The company’s portfolio of successful condominiums includes 20 Niagara, Ideal Lofts, District Lofts, Tip Top Lofts and Radio City.

Context’s first project (with partner Lloyd Alter) was a modest six-storey building at 20 Niagara Street just off Bathurst Street near Front. Designed by Wallman, Clewes, Bergman (now Architects Alliance), this condominium project captured the design community’s attention when finished in 1998. Defining the edge of a small downtown park, the building’s formal elements and unit arrangement reflect its modernist heritage.

For example, the architect’s use of east west through units allows for energy saving cross-ventilation. Large, east facing windows and smaller windows on the west wall bring light deep into the building. Both these architectural devices are integral to the modern movement’s concern for the quality of life of its occupants. Each unit allows for interior customization, something that most of its design savvy occupants preferred. Other amenities include views towards the city’s core that are among the best in the city.

What makes this building truly exceptional is that it takes a typical Toronto form and deftly re-imagines it for the site’s context and required density. As a result, this building is one of the city’s architectural gems.

If 20 Niagara represents how a small, intimate building enriches a larger metropolis, Context’s District Lofts illustrate how a gritty urban site can benefit from a strong, modernist inspired intervention.

Located near the northwest corner of Spadina and Richmond, in a district best known for its nightlife, the District Lofts quickly became a new Toronto landmark. Also designed by Architects Alliance, this building adopts the form of two parallel east west slabs rising out of a well-concealed parking plinth. At the east end of the building is a glass framed elevator core serving both sides of the building.

With typical unit sizes of 730 to 950 square feet, the fourteen-storey building uses modernist inspired stacked two storey dwellings. This space-saving technique means access corridors are only required on alternating floors. The design also allows for flow-through air circulation and natural light from both sides of the building.

According to design architect Peter Clewes, the building is about ideas rather than image. With a difficult site in the warehouse district Clewes managed to create a building that fits the neighbourhood while offering thoughtful amenities to buyers with a passion for living well. Like 20 Niagara, this building celebrates the modernist idea that good design enhances the quality of life of its inhabitants as well as that of its neighbours.

The Mississauga competition’s jurors have an opportunity to bring the city more than just a stylistic reference. They, like the people behind the best of the recent development in Toronto, can select a project that will also enhance the way we live.

This story was cross-published in Monday's National Post

AoD
 
Got some pics yesterday of Riverdale Hospital:

riverdale1.jpg


riverdale2.jpg


riverdale3.jpg


riverdale8.jpg


riverdale4.jpg


Don Jail:

don1.jpg


don2.jpg


don3.jpg


don4.jpg


Riverdale Library is one of my favourites in Toronto.

don6.jpg


don5.jpg
 
City puts Riverdale Hospital demolition plan on hold

insideTORONTO.com
DAVID NICKLE
Mar. 9, 2006

Toronto councillors have put off deciding on a proposed land transfer between Bridgepoint Health Centre and the City of Toronto until at least early May.
Councillors on the city's administration committee voted to postpone the controversial decision until after the March 30 provincial byelection in Toronto-Danforth. In the meantime, councillors are asking city lawyers to come up with a way to make sure the land is only ever used as a hospital.

That means the issue won't come back to the committee until its May 2 meeting and council at the end of May.

The move is being hailed as a minor victory among community members who have been fighting the hospital's plans to take down the half-round hospital building as a part of the redevelopment.

"We're very happy about it," said Riverdale resident Julie McGregor. "It will give the community time to address some of the issues."

McGregor and others in the community have been opposing the specifics of the plan for the redevelopment of the building.

Bridgepoint is hoping to tear down the half-round building and replace it with two other, more modern buildings. The redevelopment project also sees three eight-storey office and residential buildings.

While the historic Don Jail will stay, the half-round building, which currently perches on the edge of the Don Valley overlooking the Don Valley Parkway, would go as a part of the plan.

While the half-round hospital building is distinctive, it is not protected with an historic designation.

The administration committee supported a motion by Ward 12 Councillor Frank Di Giorgio (York South-Weston) on behalf of local Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 30, Toronto-Danforth), to let the provincial government decide what to do about the building - after the byelection.

"At this point the issue of the half-round building has come up again and again and it is very definitely an active discussion in my community," Fletcher said.

"We're talking about a major redevelopment the likes of which have never been seen in this community - making sure the I's are dotted and the T's are crossed is important before all our assets are switched and exchanged."

The land transfer would see the city convey lands it owns at 14 St. Matthews Rd., the current location of the St. Matthews Lawn Bowling Clubhouse, and 548 Gerrard St. E.

Under the deal negotiated by staff, Bridgepoint would have to use those lands to construct a healthcare facility within 10 years, or else they would revert to the city.

Ward 20 Councillor Martin Silva (Trinity-Spadina), however, said the city needs a firmer guarantee that the land won't some day be converted into condominiums.

"I'm worried about giving city land to a corporation that today is a good corporation, but we are all listening now to the news about private hospitals coming down the pipe, now a private hospital's not so good," Silva said. "And the step from private hospitals being changed to luxury condominiums - that's not so big."

Bridgepoint president Marian Walsh was hesitant to comment on the implications of Silva's motion. However, she said the agreed-upon covenant was already restrictive. She said that a permanent covenant would "change the nature of the deal quite significantly."

But she said that the only plans for the land at Broadview Avenue and Gerrard Street East right now are health related.
 
The administration committee supported a motion by Ward 12 Councillor Frank Di Giorgio (York South-Weston) on behalf of local Councillor Paula Fletcher (Ward 30, Toronto-Danforth), to let the provincial government decide what to do about the building - after the byelection.

What a cop-out.

AoD
 

Back
Top