Thursday, May 23, 2013Mostly Cloudy 19°C
City

The Distillery District may get a hotel, but not this one

Posted by Chris Bateman / February 21, 2012

Distillery District HotelA much buzzed about proposal to build a 34-storey hotel-condo opposite the main gates of the Distillery District was recently sent back to the architects for redesign by the City's design review panel, a group that advises Council on achieving quality architecture and landscaping. The decision of the panel, while not necessarily surprising, raises a few questions about Toronto's willingness to embrace bold architectural projects in historic districts.

A recent recipient of an award from Architecture Magazine, the Rack House D project — cited for its progressive use of materials and "massive, powerful" presence — was turned down over fears that it might set a precedent for other, lower-quality towers around the historic Gooderham & Worts site as well as concerns over its effect on the Trinty-Mill Street area.

The panel had no qualms with the building itself — they praised its "beautiful, world-class" appearance and noted the developer's conservation record in their January 23 meeting — but a majority of panel members suggested the size of the structure might negatively impact the area. It's worth noting the area north of Mill Street was not included in the master plan devised in the 1990s for redevelopment of Distillery and that the building is currently vacant.

The Distillery is underserved by hotels and Cityscape Development, co-owners of the old Gooderham & Worts factory, have been looking at proposals for years, according to an article in the Star, which also draws comparisons to New York's Meatpacking district, an area successfully redeveloped into a fashionable neighbourhood with a thriving nightlife.

Distillery District HotelCityscape hopes that by adding a fashionable place to stay, it can boost the number of after-hours visitors to the Distillery. Use of the site for a hotel wasn't itself a concern for the panel — in fact, it was seen as a positive — but this particular design left too many "unknowns" for the members' liking.

In Saucier + Perrotte's original design, the historic whiskey/wine storage building currently on the site would be converted into a restaurant and bar. Floors 2 - 6 of the tower would become a hotel, the rest, floors 8 - 34 would be sold as private condos. Now that the ball is back in the architect's court, one can expect that considerable modifications will be made to the design.

And so we're left with a number of questions. Is the design review panel's decision wrong? Or is this conservative approach the most one prudent given the unique historical character of the area? Should a chance have been taken on Rack House D given the praise the design has received and the fact it preserves and revitalizes a vacant heritage building? As the minutes from the DRP meeting put it, "Does an outstanding design justify the irreversible change to the Rack House D building and the Distillery District's core heritage area?"

Rack House D DistilleryRack House D South Elevation Rack House D InteriorRenderings from Saucier + Perrotte

Discussion

11 Comments

Neighbour / February 21, 2012 at 03:29 pm
user-pic
The planners are not putting a parking garage in this building. Even the hotel parking will be off site. That can't be good for the neighbourhood.
pat / February 21, 2012 at 03:49 pm
user-pic
That's only 4 floors of hotel! They're hoping for 27 floors of condos! Heck, if you're doing a hotel, please do it right (and yes, include parking for those driving in from out of town, or who rent cars at the airport).
Gongoozler / February 21, 2012 at 04:13 pm
user-pic
Objections stem from the development agreement that governs the Distillery Historic District. The original vision allowed modern development in the District as long as the Trinity Street corridor remained as an historic enclave. The developers have complied with the letter of this concept if not the intent. The three glass towers already approved are set back from Trinity Street, even if they are visible. The Rack House "D" proposal encroaches on and even dominates this view.
Earthjuice / February 21, 2012 at 04:17 pm
user-pic
What a huge disappointment. I was so looking forward to this building getting approved. Having said that, I was under the impression the entire building was to be a hotel, not a scant few-ish floors with the lion's share being condos. Also, previous renders I had seen of this building were more appealing than the one's used in this article. I pray that the design panel doesn't dumb down the design to meet a size requirement, then have us end up with yet another cookiecutter banal rectangular glass structure that seems to be overtaking this city like a fungus. Design Panel, architectural excellence first, second and third, please! Then require that same excellence in subsequent buildings. Let's make this project work!
Jordan / February 21, 2012 at 05:21 pm
user-pic
Is 'size' really a justifiable reason to reject the building? Is that even in the design review committees mandate? If it's truly a beautiful design - the design committee should give it a go-ahead. A fear of other ugly towers popping up nearby is not a justifiable reason to reject a building - if anything, the towers already going up in the distillery are the one's which justify this one going up. The precedent has already been set.

I have a feeling this is more about Toronto architects having a fit that they didn't get the project, than any of the vague gibberish that the article lists out.
Cyril Sneer / February 21, 2012 at 05:32 pm
user-pic
more glass cubes

hooooooray
dan philips / February 21, 2012 at 08:06 pm
user-pic
* go with a long horizontal proscenium gateway hotel that spans both old buildings and provides parking without rising so vertically high . . . just a thought.
efi / February 21, 2012 at 10:13 pm
user-pic
^ I agree with the height. I dont get the obsession with building so tall in areas that average at around 4-6 storeys. Compact buildings lend themselves better to unique design, as well.

The biggest question is, if they have the money to eat up an entire warehouse building, well isn't that more than big enough for a hotel? Even with just a couple storeys added to it.
ilig / February 22, 2012 at 02:32 am
user-pic
This is an absolute eyesore, please can we not get too trendy?? something like does would look dated the very day is finished, what not work with classic lines that can look good even 100 years from now. It is scary to see these kind of things and know that there is really nothing we can do to avoid them as greed and the "right amount of money" offered will have the last word.
Lindsay / February 24, 2012 at 08:46 pm
user-pic
I don't think the point of an historic district is to "embrace bold architectural projects." That being said, this project could proceed and be a successful adaptive reuse project with a little thought and effort- think massing, setbacks, scale, and in kind materials. The character of the historic structure and district are both lost in this design.
rg_arch / March 20, 2012 at 12:43 am
user-pic
THE panel is correct. I am a post modernist, and urbanism lover. But this design is completely inappropriate. Architecture, is not a bold design to 'look at from the sidewalk'. It is complex and about what the true outcome will be and how the building will 'feel' compared to these soft' photoshopped renderings.

The CURRENT condo already added has already destroyed many perspective views from with-in the district.

The distillery district, is the largest joined compound of VICTORIAN INDUSTRIAL ARCHITECTURE in North America. It is so special. Impossible to replicate. The only area that really has a strong consistant historic sense in Toronto. The only area, where you could actually feel consistent language instead of scattered accents of history. The key word is also INDUSTRIAL. Scale, is the strongest measure that defines historically industrial area's since they are ether low-mid rise. It is an important part of it's british nature.

There are blank empty lots surround the small, handful of the distillery district compound. They can easily allow high rised condo's to be built on the outside empty lots. This will keep the distillery district feel, strong and unique while allowing a newer collection of architecture 'greatness' as this writer emplies to be neighbouring instead of imposing.

When you impose a high-rise, directly onsite in the distillery, you change the internal views. You cast strong, almost permanent shadow. You feel scale or 'size' more than the walls at grade. The industrial character beneath will just appear as masonry or as you say 'brick' shell of accented shops beneath a glass tower. Which basically will not feel unique. After A few more of these towers pop up, the area will feel like another Yorkville cumberland shop area, surrounded by towers.

Add a Comment

Other Cities: Montreal