Today Sat Sun
It is forcast to be Thunderstorm at 11:00 PM EDT on May 25, 2012
Thunderstorm
31°/17°
It is forcast to be Partly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 26, 2012
Partly Cloudy
22°/18°
It is forcast to be Mostly Cloudy at 11:00 PM EDT on May 27, 2012
Mostly Cloudy
22°/15°

12 Comments

news

People For The Ethical Treatment Of Architecture

2007_03_02Riverdale.jpg
In the 1978 book, Lost Toronto, William Dendy wrote that in the 20th century, many Georgian and Victorian buildings were fated to a date with the wrecking ball because of neglect and “changing tastes.” Now, the architecture that took their place has fallen out of favour and structures such as the Massey Ferguson plant and Riverdale Hospital (pictured above), have been torn down or are slated for demolition.
The goal of Dominion Modern —an archive of 20th century Canadian architecture and design—is not only to collect and catalogue, but also to preserve and promote public understanding and debate. Bucking this trend of tearing useful buildings down just because they’ve gone out of fashion is what its new exhibition and book, both titled Endangered Species, is all about.
Artist, gardener and writer Gene Threndyle contributed an essay about the destruction of the Inglis Plant on Strachan Avenue and East Liberty Street, to the Endangered Species book. He got involved with the preservation of buildings as a private citizen. What vexes him most about what he calls “the culture of demolition” is the waste. “By tearing down Riverdale Hospital, we will be releasing 75,000 tons of greenhouse gas into the environment,” he says (in comparision, if you drive 20,000 miles a year, your car will release 21,000 lbs of carbon dioxide).
“We also lose our stories,” says Threndyle. In his essay, he writes about how in the 1930s, the Inglis Plant was used to make guns to fight fascism. At that time, the factory was almost entirely staffed by women. “That’s an important story.” He cites nearby examples where maintaining the structural narrative of the city was successful. “Where they kept the old buildings in Liberty Village there’s thriving business like Nelvana. And Upper Canada Brewery got its start there.”
Not every structure can—or should—be saved. But for people like Threndyle, “if something is broken, it needs to be fixed or replaced,” not tossed aside. Buildings featured in the book and exhibit include the moderne Maple Leaf Gardens, the Workmen’s Compensation Board Complex, and that soaring example of modernism, City Hall (an example of building that is not, as far as we know, endangered). The exhibition will be held March 3–4, from 1 p.m.–6 p.m. at The Institute Without Boundaries, 207 Adelaide Street East (at Jarvis). Admission is free and books will be on sale at the venue.
Photo courtesy Dominion Modern

Comments

  • Sean Galbraith

    Now THAT’s a PETA I could support.

  • mongo

    I almost cried when I saw the old mental health building (999 Queen West) that was demolished despite Jack Diamond’s plan to rehabilitate it in last sunday’s Star. It was replaced with the current brutalist travesty. What is wrong with this city that it destroys architecture?

  • Evan Munday

    Hey, there’s a discussion at the U of T Reading Series on March 15 about this very topic. It’s called ‘Whatever Happened To Old Toronto?’
    Thursday, March 15, 2007 FRE
    Hart House, East Common Room (7 Hart House Circle), 7pm
    A panel discussion with Sally Gibson, Michael Redhill, and John Lorinc with moderator Barry Callaghan

  • Marc Lostracco

    Mark my words: in a decade or two, we’re going to realize how much of a mistake it was to tear-down architecturally-significant Riverdale Hospital. And for what? Sigh.

  • Evan Munday

    Hey, there’s a discussion at the U of T Reading Series on March 15 about this very topic. It’s called ‘Whatever Happened To Old Toronto?’
    Thursday, March 15, 2007 FRE
    Hart House, East Common Room (7 Hart House Circle), 7pm
    A panel discussion with Sally Gibson, Michael Redhill, and John Lorinc with moderator Barry Callaghan

  • Chris Taylor

    Have you guys actually seen the insides of Riverdale/Bridgepoint Hospital? It is an old structure and it is pretty awful compared to the newer wings of places like Sick Kids, Sunnybrook, Toronto and North York General Hospitals. It has been renovated, sure, but there is only so much you can do with the existing structure, which is small as GTA-area hospitals go.
    My great-aunt spent a few years there before succumbing to cancer and while it may look pretty on the outside, the conditions inside are cramped and uncomfortable. It is simply too small for the amount of people crammed into it. And you’re paying a couple grand a month for the privilege, too. Not for a private room either, but for one spot in an ordinary four-person berth. If you’re lucky, you will get the window spot and have some natural light and a view of either the DVP or the old Don Jail. If you’re unlucky you’ll get stuck by the door and hopefully the guys with the window seats won’t keep their privacy curtains drawn all day long. If they do open the curtains, hopefully you’re not on the side of the building that faces the back of the Don Jail. The four elevators are slow-moving and there is usually a fair amount of people waiting for them on each floor. The kitchen area is tiny and the cafeteria space is huge (and never fully utilised). The outdoor courtyard is relatively nice in the summer but is of course shadowed by the adjacent Don Jail, which is not exactly cheerful. This is a hospital full of long-term and palliative care patients, many of whom are never going home again, and 50% of them will spend their days staring at a 19th century prison (and its modern counterpart). How do you think that might affect patient morale? Mentally, do you think they might draw some parallels?
    The thing that gets lost in the debate of over this structure is the quality of patient care. The existing building may look nice as long as you don’t have to depend on it for your own personal health care (or that of a loved one). But if you spend any extended amount of time there, the shortcomings of the old facility quickly become apparent.

  • Hey

    I’m interested in these 30s when the Inglis plant was making arms to fight fascism. Is anyone at Torontoist literate or numerate?

  • Adam Sobolak

    “The thing that gets lost in the debate of over this structure is the quality of patient care. The existing building may look nice as long as you don’t have to depend on it for your own personal health care (or that of a loved one). But if you spend any extended amount of time there, the shortcomings of the old facility quickly become apparent.”
    Ah, the same easy alibi used against John Howard’s 999 Queen in the 70s. Bingo, gotcha there.
    Chris Taylor: advocating maintaining the building (or *any* building or place, short of Thomas-Edison-lab cases) does not equate with advocating absolute, unrelenting suspension of its current function and conditions in aspic.
    Furthermore, Don Jail, unfortunately, is a “permanent condition”–well, the c19 building is–and the still-functioning 50s jail is earmarked for closure and removal, anyway. So even this “permanent condition” isn’t necessarily suspended in aspic, either. And technically, if it’s such a depressing, patient-morale-wrecking presence now, how would it be any different relative to the planned *new* Bridgepoint facilities? You might as well argue that no health facility be built here *at all*, if Don Jail’s that much of a downer…

  • Chris Taylor

    Adam — I indicated quite clearly that the facility was recently renovated. It is not in as-built condition now, I do not think its preservationists are arguing for it to be maintained in as-built condition, nor would I ever wish for it to revert to as-built condition as long as patients were still resident there.
    Take off the ideological blinders for two seconds and realise that my comment describes my experiences visiting the facility over the course of several years up to mid-2006. It is not advocacy of the current development plan, it is not advocacy of any preservation plan, only a wish for a better hospital on the same location. Most patients’ families would probably say the same. We don’t care what the facility looks like as long as it does a better job than it’s doing now.
    My great-aunt has passed and thus I have no stake in Bridgepoint nor do I care a whit about whetwer it survives in present form or is replaced by the worst-looking abomination ever to grace the Don Valley. My point was simply that the current structure is inadequate, and romanticism about the current building largely ignores whether it’s beneficial for patients. Having known a late patient there and having visited her regularly over several years, I thought I would contribute what I know about its facilities. That’s all.
    Go developer-baiting elsewhere Mr. Sobolak — I’m not a developer, I’m not interested. And way to make friends and pick up supporters for the cause.

  • Adam Sobolak

    Chris: re the “as long as patients were still resident there”: note that I offered that its *function* wasn’t suspended in aspic, either. And given what you’re stating about the Don Jail’s presence, then, why much such cronic-care be tethered to this particular *location*, never mind the building itself?
    And again, your same “I knew a beloved one who suffered there” argument might have been used four decades ago against 999 Queen, which was arguably (or not just arguably) even *worse*. Look; bleeding-heart heritage philistinism is bleeding-heart heritage philistinism, no matter how you slice it…

  • GH

    Adam, what if one does not think the building should survive on an aesthetic basis? Is that a valid difference of opinion or just plain old philistinism? I’ll match your ism with my own. Claiming philistinism is just elitism, intended to end the debate by judging all who don’t see the same architectural significance and beauty as poor souls who really should just still to hockey and strip malls and leave the important matters of our city’s visual milieu to those qualified.

  • Adam Sobolak

    True enough–however, Chris Taylor didn’t really address aesthetics in his argument, at least as pertains to Riverdale Hospital. Rather, I was “looking beyond” by pointing out the broader tripwires in his argument, aside from the relative merits of the “half-round”. (And one must admit that while opinion on the latter remains divided, there’s more unanimity on the actual or potential removal of 999 Queen and the original Don Jail being a barbarism.)
    Re his great-aunt’s experience: all I’ll say is that there are others with a less harrowing or even relatively pleasant experience in the building, and a lot of the “unpleasantness” may just be the nature of the chronic-care beast–however, I’m not going to “side” with that opposite POV, merely offer it from a “results may vary” standpoint. And I’ve even already fundamentally agreed that, perhaps, the building no longer meets optimum chronic-care standards, 2007-style, if that’s what’s at stake here. But that doesn’t render it totally, terminally dysfunctional for *any* purpose whatsoever; then you might as well judge old Don Jail as if it still served (and can *only* serve) as a functioning prison.
    But above all, re the “bleeding heart” point, bear in mind there are many cases out there of distinguished heritage landmarks with even nastier stigmas attached: Jim Crow, political dictatorship, sex-abuse scandals et al. I, myself, have come across perfectly sensitive people who can’t bring themselves to commit on behalf of endangered religious structures because of the denominational associations with abuse, homophobia, etc–the hurt is too deep.
    Maybe the solution there is, rather than to baste in one’s agony, to confront, head-on–and look beyond, perhaps with a creative, subversive degree of disarming forgiveness. Sort of like, maybe that schoolteacher or neighbour was a nasty b*****d to you, but attending his funeral or visitation (or just reading his notice) might enlighten you to the fundamental, fascinating humanity behind the so-called nastiness.
    Perhaps, in the case of Riverdale Hospital, some may feel it’s making an aesthetic mountain out of a molehill, esp. w/the “real landmark” being the Don Jail–but the fact that it’s become a heritage issue *at all* has been enough to open a lot of forgiving eyes…