City
What Toronto building should be demolished next?
The news of the week was surely the announcement that David Mirvish and Frank Gehry plan to transform a stretch of King West that currently includes the Princess of Wales Theatre. Perhaps interestingly, the general sentiment seems to be that the building is a necessary casualty to the march of progress and superior architectural vision. So despite the fact that I've railed about all the wonderful buildings that Toronto has senselessly razed over the years, reaction to this project has me thinking about what other structures we might want to see bite the dust.
Over at Canada.com Marc Weisblott has already put together a list of potential candidates, which includes the Rogers Centre, the ROM, and Honest Ed's, amongst others. These buildings also make appearances in the suggestions below, which are derived from our Twitter followers. Other noteworthy (and surprising) additions include the iconic OCAD Building (sacrilege, I say), City Hall (what?), and a couple of concrete-clad downtown hotels.
I don't think I'd like to see any of these buildings replaced, but I'd be interested in hearing arguments for and against. Let us know in the comments what Toronto building you could do without or why we must protect the ones that have been mentioned here.
Photo by Tom Podolec in the blogTO Flickr pool
Discussion
28 Comments
Sort By Oldest First / Newest First
Subscribe
Not much I would demolish in TO, it represents an era and style, some of it not so pretty some of it stunning and everything in between. I would prefer to see better plan for the city, more integration of the buildings with the street and the people. A strong move away from the car culture that hinders Toronto's livable factor. The suburbs want cars, fine they have the space and the need, the core has neither.
Destroy CN Tower, Queen's Park, and Fort York? These people must have had massive lobotomies to think that any of these should be removed.
There are too many people in Toronto that complain about the buildings, but it's because they don't take a chance to look at them and appreciate the beauty - they think that every building should look like Versailles (but are unwilling to pay for it).
One structure I'd like to see destroyed would be the Gardiner, the shabbiness of it makes it seem like you're in LA or Detroit :S. If it had to be a building, it would be the Trump Tower. Gaudy, ugly, and does nothing for the downtown core, much like Trump's other ugly towers in Manhattan.
I would sacrifice an aesthetically pleasing stadium for access. One of the only allures of Rogers Centre is its proximity to both transit and major arteries and that would be crucial to consider if a new stadium were to be built.
2. Ontario place
3. Gardiner expressway
Part of the thing that makes the Skydome unwelcoming are losing teams and apathetic fans. Almost every US stadium is very unwelcoming and a poor example to use because they're surrounded by 10,000 parking spots that sit empty 200 days a year. At least the Skydome is urban in its general nature.
Maybe the public don't realize the flaws of the building but let me explain some.
The building impedes off the property line and therefore setbacks are crossed and there the ROM is paying for Fees because of its invasion of say, airspace. Needed?
The museum displays along the walls are angled. Ask Anubis curator if placing artifacts and treasures are easy. Try fitting condo furniture in a room designed like the ROM.
Angled walls. Did you know you can't walk near some edges because of the angled walls because you'll hit your head? So what is the use of those spaces from9m a side profile?
Speaking of wasted spaces, have you seen an elevation or side view of how the new ROM connects to the old building? Did you see the amount of wasted space misused? Or unused?
The Crystal. I'm guessing most people don't remember that it was supposed to be more transparent but then had to quickly change the building envelope because they couldn't figure out the weather properly lol.
Handicap accessible button for doors. So yes it is to building code height, but did you know someone in a wheelchair has a hard time reaching it?
Ooh this one is interesting. Icicles! In the winter they have to rope off a section of the ENTRANCE because of the icicles forming off the 'crystal edges'. How lovely for your guests isn't it.
I could pick apart the building or any building for that matter, but 5is one missed the target by a long shot. If you really want to see a great building of Daniel, go to Germany and check out the Jewish museum. That is where his best work lies. Not the ROM, not the shopping center he did on Vegas.
People can love the building if they want, I don't care. But don't judge so quickly with smoke and mirrors. Be more analytical.
All great insights, but "Joe and Jane" walking by this or any other building likely isn't judging based on all these insights, especially those with respect to function; they're often judged on form and the emotional impact the design may or may not have.
There are people who would walk by a bunch of buildings, never enter one of them, and come away with an impression of the city, either good or bad, depending on their tastes.
A city's skyline or architectural profile is hardly something someone's going to assess based on the degree to which building codes were met.
On the city's dime of course.
It gets better.
The city could then build him one of those ugly and fake looking, nouveau riche stone castles, with an elevator to his fully automated private subway. This subway would take him to all football field's and KFC's in the city, while avoiding those pesky journalists and pinko places, like city hall and biking lanes.
Rob Ford, Spending taxpayer's money... his way.