Gansevoort Hotel & Condos by Saucier + Perrotte. 60 Mill Street, Distillery District.

Renderings from Kiyoko on BuzzBuzzHome forum, via Southcore on UrbanToronto.

http://www.buzzbuzzhome.com/forum/default.aspx?g=posts&t=862

http://img3.imageshack.us/img3/8250/rackhouse1.jpg

http://img171.imageshack.us/img171/1707/rackhouseaerialview.jpg

http://img11.imageshack.us/img11/1043/rackhousefromdistillery.jpg

http://img20.imageshack.us/img20/8527/rackhousemillstreetview.jpg

http://img585.imageshack.us/img585/3848/rackhousepodium.jpg

http://img851.imageshack.us/img851/7360/rackhouseviewatmidheigh.jpg

Not a fan, that ruins the old building. I hope this one gets shot down by the city and the OMB.

love it! the podium could be treated better though, that is for sure.

I preferred the original design for the Gansevoort when it was going to be built downtown, but it will be a HUGE boost for the Distillery District, and good for the city overall.

The Pan(Not Pam) Village, and all the other developments will be a huge boost, the Distillery doesn't need this to help it out. I'm not saying they shouldn't build at the distillery but that's one of Toronto's oldest structures. That could be the perfect building for a Toronto Museum. For God's sake they're proposing something boxy on top of pitched roof. There are so many other locations at the Distillery they could build a hotel/condo.

Rack House D (Building 42) is the largest Victorian rack house (barrel storage building) at the Distillery District. Designed by David Roberts Junior and opened in 1890, the six-storey red brick building commands the northeast corner of Mill and Trinity Streets. The exterior is massive and simple, composed of a series of brick piers and recessed brick panels, capped by an arcade in a dropped corbel pattern unique to the buildings on this site. The wood-framed, double-hung windows on the east and west facades bear green-painted galvanized-metal shutters. Entrance is from the southern, Mill Street side.

Do you mean Pan Am Village when you say Pam Village or is this something different?

Sorry I think Russel Peters was on TV with Pam Anderson when I typed that.

That made me laugh pretty hard! Pam Village.. Had a nightmarish scenario playing in my head about a place where people only cooked using that disgusting spray on Pam.

'Shit makes your dishes taste rank, yo.

Pam-Ann Games sounds like a stage name for a drag queen! :yes:

Pam-Ann Games sounds like a stage name for a drag queen! :yes:

There was a real life drag queen from Australia called Pam Ann. I remember the posters when I was living in London.

http://www.studiogo.com.au/josh/portraits01/0990_POR_PamAnn.jpg

On a more serious note, I was at the Distillery yesterday, and have to say that I have mixed feelings about them demolishing the old warehouse and rebuilding the shell. That's not conservation, but I suppose that's the best one can hope for these days.

It will elevate the Distillery district quite a bit to have a hotel down there. With the West Don lands next door, this area won't feel so remote in a few years. It will feel more part of the downtown.

Believe it or not, I think Pam Ann is actually a real woman, but her act is very drag queenish! :D
Anyhow, I also have mixed feelings about this. I'm never happy to see an old building destroyed, but I do think the hotel in that vicinity will be amazing for the Distillery District. Perhaps there is a solution to allow both, if the city requires them to basically keep their hands off the historical building.

It would be cheaper for them to build anew then to destroy one of our oldest buildings. Unlike other old structures in the core that have been facaded, this one is unique as it was never sub divided on it's interior so there is nothing they can do to recreate the same effect after they gut it. Once this is gone it's gone and it's one of a kind in this city.

^^ Agreed, especially when there's all of this crap (http://maps.google.ca/maps?hl=en&ll=43.650955,-79.358819&spn=0.002104,0.004823&client=firefox-a&t=k&z=18&vpsrc=6&layer=c&cbll=43.651068,-79.359887&panoid=tSYI2D3eCDaxrcYDUSje-g&cbp=13,335.67,,0,1.62) mere metres from this historic building.

Also yes it would be great to have a hotel in the Distillery but this one will only be 5 floors, not really that big of a deal. There is a great wedge shaped parking lot on the south side of distillery lane that could house the condo/hotel with a modern podium.

I totally agree with AndrewJM3D.

While I like the hotel portion, it shows no relationship with the heritage building at all and looks like it could have been built anywhere else completely new and unencumbered.

The rack house is unique, I saw the interior once at a Doors Open, and it is very special with the racks stretching off to back and the to ceiling with layers upon layers of racks. To destroy the interior and leave only the brick facade is to destroy the heritage features of this building. They might as well not bother and just take the whole thing down.

What is with heritage protection in this city, is it to be reduced to just cosmetics stuck on a brand new building? Heritage buildings are more than just their exteriors. Should the "largest collection of Victorian-era industrial architecture in North America" only partially consist of whole buildings and the remainder facades?

I like the layers as it rises. Great design.

I totally agree with AndrewJM3D.

While I like the hotel portion, it shows no relationship with the heritage building at all and looks like it could have been built anywhere else completely new and unencumbered.

The rack house is unique, I saw the interior once at a Doors Open, and it is very special with the racks stretching off to back and the to ceiling with layers upon layers of racks. To destroy the interior and leave only the brick facade is to destroy the heritage features of this building. They might as well not bother and just take the whole thing down.

What is with heritage protection in this city, is it to be reduced to just cosmetics stuck on a brand new building? Heritage buildings are more than just their exteriors. Should the "largest collection of Victorian-era industrial architecture in North America" only partially consist of whole buildings and the remainder facades?

You've got a very good point. That hotel could go anywhere in that district but the inside of that building will never be replaced. I think they should keep the inside as it is and find some other use for it.

Well, it is just a proposal. City might tell them to go fish. I want the hotel to be close to DD, but not on top of that particular building. As much as I want the hotel there,
the city really should say no to the destruction of the rack house. I was lucky to see the interior during a Doors Open event, and it is mind-blowing.

The rack house really is one of the only buildings I can think of that can't be used for anything inside without gutting it. Perhaps this is one building we should just keep as is as a tangible link to Toronto's past. Maybe it could be used for Whiskey casks again?

On a more serious note, I was at the Distillery yesterday, and have to say that I have mixed feelings about them demolishing the old warehouse and rebuilding the shell. That's not conservation, but I suppose that's the best one can hope for these days.

This is the problem with Canadians (who I like very much by the way)...they don't fight. So many just grumble about stuff, then let people carry on walking all over them. You don't have a lot of heritage, but what you have you should be fighting tooth and nail to preserve or the whole city will end up being trashed by developers and corrupt politicians with only short term objectives in mind. This is a monstrosity of a development for this building...it's a joke.

Since I've moved here I've discovered that the lovely people of this great country seem to make it a national pastime to bend over and take it from behind from developers, phone companies, airlines, insurance companies...just about everyone. One reason I have heard is that "We know we've got it so good here that we kind of put of with the crap stuff as we can't expect to have it all." If Canadians (and I will be one before long) don't start fighting back soon they will lose many of the things that make them feel they have it so good.

^^ Very true, sir. And not just about heritage buildings; people in this city need to stand up and be heard on a number of issues, as they are in the habit of just lying down and taking whatever is dumped on them.

^^ Very true, sir. And not just about heritage buildings; people in this city need to stand up and be heard on a number of issues, as they are in the habit of just lying down and taking whatever is dumped on them.

How to do it...that's the question!

Stunning proposal from Canada's finest architects at S+P.

This is the problem with Canadians (who I like very much by the way)...they don't fight.

People feel powerless. Alright then, what should we do? I'll jump in.

Okay, I went down there today, and got it fixed in my mind where this is supposed to be going. I mistakenly thought it was going to be in the old Customs/Excise building on the north side of Mill Street, but now realize it is intended to be right inside the compound. Under no circumstance can this be allowed. It would destroy the scale and ambience of this little village. That aspect goes far beyond losing one building:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2082iDecember122011.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2064iDecember122011LowesChristmasMarket.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2130iDecember122011.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2158iDecember122011.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2155iDecember122011.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2224iDecember122011.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2240iDecember122011.jpg

Okay, I went down there today, and got it fixed in my mind where this is supposed to be going. I mistakenly thought it was going to be in the old Customs/Excise building on the north side of Mill Street, but now realize it is intended to be right inside the compound. Under no circumstance can this be allowed. It would destroy the scale and ambience of this little village. That aspect goes far beyond losing one building:

It is going to be on the north side of Mill Street -- 60 Mill St. to be exact -- which is the northeast corner of Mill & Trinity. Not sure where you got your new info that it's going to be on the south side. Just look at the renderings (at the top of this page), and it's very clear where it's going.

Regardless, I'm not thrilled about this. I don't mind a Gansevoort Hotel & Condos being built in the Distillery District, and I like the design, but I would prefer if it weren't on that corner, forever changing the existing structure. There is a danger of the Distillery District being overdeveloped.

It is going to be on the north side of Mill Street -- 60 Mill St. to be exact -- which is the northeast corner of Mill & Trinity. Not sure where you got your new info that it's going to be on the south side. Just look at the renderings (at the top of this page), and it's very clear where it's going.

Regardless, I'm not thrilled about this. I don't mind a Gansevoort Hotel & Condos being built in the Distillery District, and I like the design, but I would prefer if it weren't on that corner, forever changing the existing structure. There is a danger of the Distillery District being overdeveloped.

The whole charm of the distilery district is that it is like a walk down memory lane, to times when things were on a smaller scale and human focused.

I love skyscrapers, otherwise I wouldn't be on this site...but leave this area alone...it is one of the few parts of Toronto where you get a real sense of history and olde worlde charm.

Who do we write to to object against this?

It is going to be on the north side of Mill Street -- 60 Mill St. to be exact -- which is the northeast corner of Mill & Trinity. Not sure where you got your new info that it's going to be on the south side. Just look at the renderings (at the top of this page), and it's very clear where it's going.

Regardless, I'm not thrilled about this. I don't mind a Gansevoort Hotel & Condos being built in the Distillery District, and I like the design, but I would prefer if it weren't on that corner, forever changing the existing structure. There is a danger of the Distillery District being overdeveloped.

Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up; my first impression was correct. It is the old Customs and Excise building, which is absolutely STUNNING inside. :(.
Why does it have to be part of a historical building? Can't they just build beside the compound, like the other new condo?

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2061.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2107iDecember122011.jpg

I don't object to condos or hotels going in around the area of the DD, in fact that is EXACTLY what the area needed. The feeling of life and vitality there is 100 times more interesting than ten years ago when no one lived in that area. Now, rather than being a "district" that people drove down to on weekends, it is truly a "neighbourhood" that is a living/breathing 24 hours a day Live-Work-Play 'hood and not a dusty, empty museum wrapped in cotton batten where they locked up the gates every night when the shops and restaurants closed. But I do NOT want them taking over any of the heritage buildings. Seeing towers in the background is a small price to pay for having an incredibly interesting social experience; no matter what we think of condos, it behoves us to remember that they are simply homes for people; and not just
buildings.
Who is the City Councillor for that area?

Pam McConnell is the councilor of Ward 28.

Hmmmm.... isn't she the noobie who finally stood up to the Ferris-Wheel-Twinz when they suddenly had plans for the waterfront in her district and didn't bother to bring her in on the plan first? If so, hopefully her spine is still strong enough to stand up and say NO to this.

I love the tower, but there are at least five parking lots around the Distillery where this could be built. I see no reason to destroy such a beautiful building. If you guys are going to be protesting this, through petition or whatever, I'll join.

Ah, okay. Thanks for clearing that up; my first impression was correct. It is the old Customs and Excise building, which is absolutely STUNNING inside. :(.
Why does it have to be part of a historical building? Can't they just build beside the compound, like the other new condo?

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP2061.jpg



Can't they just take the new condo down and build the hotel there?

Hmmmm.... isn't she the noobie who finally stood up to the Ferris-Wheel-Twinz when they suddenly had plans for the waterfront in her district and didn't bother to bring her in on the plan first? If so, hopefully her spine is still strong enough to stand up and say NO to this.


It's Pam's 6th term as councilor. And the Portlands fall under Paula Fletcher's ward 30. The Ford's couldn't have an opponent with a backbone as strong as hers. In fact she would be a good solid option for our next Mayor. I would have loved to have been in the room when she found out that loser Doug had wasted $750,000 on a study and plan behind closed doors about a parcel of her ward.

. The Ford's couldn't have an opponent with a backbone as strong as hers..

The way I heard it, Fletcher was a Ford supporter up until the Portland's issue.

Not at all Taller... she's on the left edge of the NDP... used to live near her, and knew her on a first name basis, thru local east-ender politics.

Well, that is very comforting news! I do hope there are strong objections to this proposal..

The way I heard it, Fletcher was a Ford supporter up until the Portland's issue.


This was well over 2 years ago I think. The best thing is hearing Ford accuse another councilor of outburst and acting disrespectful.

l-VCiRNNWyA

A 34 storey building is ok for the Distillery District but why on top of this historic building? Toronto Star article:

Does a 34-Storey Building Belong in the Distillery District?
http://media.thestar.topscms.com/images/3f/ec/600922cc4b889693fa5836c46659.jpeg (http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1105897)
Patty Winsa
Urban Affairs Reporter
Thu Dec 22 2011

The proposal to transform a historic six-storey Gooderham and Worts building into a boutique hotel in the Distillery District isn’t what has city planners shaking their heads.

It’s the 27-storey condo above it.

Designed by famed Flatiron architect David Roberts Jr. and built in 1875, the red brick building on the northeast corner of Mill and Trinity Sts. is protected by a heritage designation and zoning that restricts any additions above its 16.5 metre height. The combined hotel-condo would be 34 storeys.

“There are going to be issues around the height, adding on and introducing a tall building at this location,” said Gregg Lintern, director of community planning for Toronto and East York district. “When you’re inside the Distillery and look north, the perspective you see is a heritage district and this would be at the top.”

But he says the city isn’t against a hotel. “The issue isn’t the use. It’s how it gets executed.”

A staff report outlining issues with the proposal will go to Toronto and East York Community Council in early January with a recommendation for a community meeting Jan. 23.

Mathew Rosenblatt and John Berman, two of four partners in Cityscape Development, which co-owns the Distillery with Dundee Realty, say they need the sale of condos to offset the costs of transforming the historic rack house into a boutique hotel. The storage house still has its original dirt floor and six storeys of timber racks that once held 22,000 barrels of aging whisky....



Read More: http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1105897

From the rendering it looks like all that will be left of the historic building is the exterior shell. THAT should concern the city planners more than the frkn height of a tower.

I'm not sure how I feel about this ... is there anything inside worth saving ? In many cases the answer is no, less the outside ... which will be fully restored ... can we ask for more honestly ?

Looks like there is a lot of merit to the building.

can we ask for more honestly ?


Yes we should not only ask for more, but demand it. This is one of the last of its kind. Once its gone, that's it. I don't have a problem with 34 floors, I have a problem with bastardizing one of the last unspoiled industrial buildings we have left.

Demolishing and rebuilding a shell is NOT preservation.

Yes we should not only ask for more, but demand it. This is one of the last of its kind. Once its gone, that's it. I don't have a problem with 34 floors, I have a problem with bastardizing one of the last unspoiled industrial buildings we have left.

Demolishing and rebuilding a shell is NOT preservation.

Just what is inside that is worth preserving? I honestly don't know and am only asking.

Well, it is kind of hard to describe. The building was 100% purpose-built for storing the whisky barrels for ageing, and really could not be easily changed to another purpose without ripping the entire thing apart. The whole interior is a Byzantine complex of intricate and high stacking wooden storage racks. They go up to the ceiling, and barrels could be slid into the middle or out of the maze. I'm not describing it well, and my photos probably look inexplicable. You kind of have to be there to see it:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6901.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6902.jpg

The interior is a highly organized maze of these huge wooden beams and pillars:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6903.jpg

I realize it is pretty hard to try and figure out what the heck you are looking at... snapshots don't
really capture how the system works, and you have no idea of the orientation by my pictures:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6905.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6908.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6909.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6911.jpg

this might be in a different building; it was a few years back so my memory is hazy:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6915.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6917.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6918.jpg

I'm inclined to think that until we can think up a good use for a conversion, then hands off, no matter how tempting it would be to yank out and recycle all those yummy old growth oak beams.

I always knew you'd come around.

Well, it is kind of hard to describe. The building was 100% purpose-built for storing the whisky barrels for ageing, and really could not be easily changed to another purpose without ripping the entire thing apart. The whole interior is a Byzantine complex of intricate and high stacking wooden storage racks. They go up to the ceiling, and barrels could be slid into the middle or out of the maze. I'm not describing it well, and my photos probably look inexplicable. You kind of have to be there to see it:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6901.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6902.jpg

The interior is a highly organized maze of these huge wooden beams and pillars:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6903.jpg

I realize it is pretty hard to try and figure out what the heck you are looking at... snapshots don't
really capture how the system works, and you have no idea of the orientation by my pictures:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6905.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6908.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6909.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6911.jpg

this might be in a different building; it was a few years back so my memory is hazy:

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6915.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6917.jpg

http://i82.photobucket.com/albums/j251/dawnd_01/FALL%202011/IMGP6918.jpg

I'm inclined to think that until we can think up a good use for a conversion, then hands off, no matter how tempting it would be to yank out and recycle all those yummy old growth oak beams.

Great photos as always TB. I suppose one could always store urns/coffins there or maybe lumber. The thing is, this building has to be able to pay for its upkeep unless some very generous soul is willing to come along and sponsor it. From a purely historical perspective, it would be a great shame to lose the interior, but if the only alternative is for it be sacrificed and gain a new purpose in order to save the exterior as part of a guaranteed new future then we must weigh the options and decide - well, not us, but rather the owners. After all, our opinions mean sweet F.A. I think this is a battle which we can't possibly win though I would be greatly cheered to be proven wrong.

Europe is littered with thousands of buildings that 'don't pay their way', but are deemed important because they are a link to their past. Does everything need to generate dollars to avoid the wrecking ball?

Europe is littered with thousands of buildings that 'don't pay their way', but are deemed important because they are a link to their past. Does everything need to generate dollars to avoid the wrecking ball?


That's exactly what I was going to say.

There are a considerable number of historical buildings in Toronto that in no way even come remotely close to paying their own way.

I think the developers could try to be more creative than gutting the interior and sticking a high-rise hotel up the middle. There are empty parking lots immediately north of this building which could easily accommodate the hotel while leaving the rack-house untouched.
It could even still be used for various hotel uses, remove some of the racking system on one side or the middle and insert check-in desk, lobby bar/lounge on a different level, etc. How cool would it be sipping a drink in a area carved out of and surrounded by century old timber racks which may have actually been involved in the creation of the alcohol uses in your drink?
Other possibilities: Art gallery, the supports for art already exist, winery, restaurant, etc.

The city has a section on their site with various reports about this proposal:

http://www.toronto.ca/planning/60_mill.htm

Community Council Meeting – The preliminary report will be presented to Community Council on January 10, 2012.


Community Consultation Meeting – Will likely be held in mid-January, 2012, date and venue to be confirmed.


Design Review Panel
The proposal will be presented and discussed at the City of Toronto's Design Review Panel on February 21, 2012.


For more information visit the City of Toronto's Design Review Panel website (http://www.toronto.ca/planning/designreviewpanel.htm).
Contact:

Willie Macrae
Planner, Community Planning
City Hall, 18th Floor, East Tower
100 Queen Street West
Toronto, ON M5H 2N2
Tel: 416-392-7572
Fax: 416-392-1330
Email: wmacrae@toronto.ca


You can also contact your Ward Councillor:
Councillor Pam McConnell
Ward 28, Toronto Centre - Rosedale
Tel: 416-392-7916
Email: councillor_mcconnell@toronto.ca

http://www.thestar.com/news/article/1135370--builder-still-on-track-for-distillery-district-condo-hotel-development

Builder still on track for Distillery District condo/hotel development

Published On Wed Feb 22 2012
Donovan Vincent
Staff Reporter

The developer behind a proposed 34-storey hotel/condominium project in the Distillery District still wants to proceed with the plan, despite the city’s concerns about its height and fit for the historic area.

“We haven’t been told it’s a no-go,’’ said David Jackson, one of four partners with Cityscape Development, co-owner of the Distillery with Dundee Realty. Jackson said that, though his team believes the design is appropriate, they’re open to exploring options.

The project, estimated to cost up to $130 million, would be the first hotel in the popular tourist area. A total of 88 hotel suites and 246 condo units are planned, and the developers hope to have the project completed by 2017.

A preliminary city report notes the proposed height and density are a “significant departure’’ from what was outlined in the original Gooderham & Worts heritage master plan, and a secondary plan for the King and Parliament Sts. area, neither of which contemplated additions to the rack house at Mill and Trinity Sts.

The rack house, currently vacant, contains six floors of traditional racks used to house large barrels for aging whisky. Doing a hotel conversion would take a long time because the racks, which would have to be removed currently support the building, Jackson said.

Although the quality of design is not in question, the panel majority felt the “massing’’ — its overall size — was not appropriate in that location, given its potential impact on Trinity St. and the area’s heritage continuity. There were also concerns about the shadow cast by such a tall building.

...Jackson, of Cityscape, said his team isn’t “fixated” on 34 storeys and will soon turn attention to the height concerns.

...A final report on the application is set for sometime this summer.

To me the question is not the 32 storeys, but what will happen to the historical building.

To me the question is not the 32 storeys, but what will happen to the historical building.

Agree. The height isn't an issue whatsoever, it's how much of the rack house will get destroyed forever in the process.

love the project -- I just hope they can repurpose the racks instead of tearing it all down as the developer wants to do.