Thoreau MacDonald, The Old Schoolhouse, Thornhill
“The Schoolyard was on the corner of Jane and Elizabeth Sts, well situated with hills for sleighing, and a creek running through the lower part. A high boardfence enclosed it, with turnstile gates to keep in any cows that might be pastured there. The one room brick schoolhouse had a beautifully coved and arched ceiling with fine big cross beams and king posts all nicely chamfered off. It was built in 1847 and burned sometime in the ‘20s. The school was supposed to be heated by a big heater in one corner. This was fired by the teacher who was Mr Tom McCormick in my time. There was a well in the yard but no water. There were even a couple of old apple trees covered with green apples too hard to eat, but handy as missiles. I’ve always appreciated these educational advantages, and remain thankful that I didn’t have to attend the big, fancy schools of today” — Thoreau MacDonald
Even as far back as the 1960s, Toronto was concerned about its waterfront being a ‘people friendly’ place. It had suffered through more than a century of intense industrialization which cut the city off from the lakefront. By the late 1960s, half a century of automobile-centric lakeside planning had made the Toronto waterfront an unappealing, heavily industrialized location, despite its obvious potential.
Ontario Place was conceived to help to revitalize the waterfront, attract tourists to Toronto, and in part, appease the City, which was frustrated at the high level of government investment that flowed to rival Montreal for Expo 67.
The park itself was originally conceived as an onshore exhibit, but this idea was discarded in favour of five large, architecturally unique, three-level Pods. Each Pod would be approximately 8,000 square feet (743 m²) in area, and suspended by steel cables from four large central pylons driven deep into the lake bed. These Pods would initially house various Ontario-themed exhibits in an aquatic setting somewhat similar in concept to Montreal’s Expo 67 grounds (which were in the middle of the St. Lawrence River). However, a difficult but unexpectedly useful problem developed. The cost of the open-water Pod foundations alone (at the time, estimated at C$9 million) would consume almost the entire budget for the Pods’ construction. Architect Eb Zeidler was faced with a dilemma: how to construct the Pods without the necessary budget.
Zeidler developed an innovative solution: after a trip to the Caribbean, he realized that a “barrier reef” concept would cut down on wave action from the lake enough to reduce the cost of the Pods’ foundation to 1/10 of the original open-water estimate. After some quarrels with the port authorities (due to the dangers of the unseen reef to shipping), the reef plan was modified to incorporate three artificial “barrier islands” made from city landfill. Ironically, the barrier islands were to be so well crafted, they became an integral part of the Ontario Place experience.
The children’s village was designed by Eric McMillan; the glass pagoda building was designed by Raymond Moriyama.
Viljo Revell is one Finland´s foremost architects of international renown. He graduated from Helsinki University of Technology in 1937. His breakthrough was the Glass Palace in Helsinki (1936), which he designed during his student years together with Niilo Kokko and Heimo Riihimäki. The Glass Palace is one of the very few purely functionalistic buildings in Helsinki today. Viljo Revell is one Finland´s foremost architects of international renown. He graduated from Helsinki University of Technology in 1937. His breakthrough was the Glass Palace in Helsinki (1936), which he designed during his student years together with Niilo Kokko and Heimo Riihimäki. The Glass Palace is one of the very few purely functionalistic buildings in Helsinki today.Viljo Revell
1910 - 1964
The skyline of Toronto in 1950. The right-half of the central blank property on the waterfront is the 10.5 acres purchased for the development of the Redpath Toronto refinery. Note that the waterfront landfill creation has not yet been completed on the right (east) of the Jarvis Street slip.
(Redpath Sugar Museum Collection)
“Bricking-in” the Main Process Building of the Redpath Sugar Refinery in Toronto. The cubic girderwork immediately to the left is for the Packaging building, that to the right is for the Powerhouse, and the V-shaped girderwork is for the Raw Sugar Shed
(1958).
(Redpath Sugar Museum Collection)
Trinity standing
Eaton Centre under construction.
Timothy Eaton founded a dry goods store on Yonge Street in the 19th century, and that small shop went on to revolutionize retailing in Canada, ultimately becoming the largest department store chain in the country. By the 20th century, the Eaton’s chain owned most of the land bounded by Yonge, Queen, Bay and Dundas streets, with the notable exceptions of Old City Hall and the Church of the Holy Trinity. The Eaton’s land, once the site of Timothy Eaton’s first store, was occupied by Eaton’s large Main Store, the Eaton’s Annex and a number of related mail order and factory buildings. As the chain’s warehouse and support operations were increasingly shifting to cheaper suburban locales in the 1960s, Eaton’s wanted to make better use of its valuable downtown landholdings. In particular, the chain wanted to build a massive new flagship store to replace the aging Main Store at Yonge and Queen and the Eaton’s College Street store a few blocks to the north. In the mid-1960s, Eaton’s announced plans for a massive office and shopping complex that would occupy several city blocks. Initial plans for the centre called for the demolition of both Old City Hall (except for the clock tower and cenotaph) and the Church of the Holy Trinity, as well as the closing of a number of small city streets within the above-noted block (Albert Street, Louisa Street, Terauley Street, James Street, Albert Lane, Downey’s Lane and Trinity Square). At one point, even the City Hall clock tower was slated for demolition. After a fierce local debate over the fate of the city hall and church buildings, Eaton’s put its plans on hiatus in 1967. The Eaton Centre plans were resuscitated in 1971, although these plans allowed for the preservation of Old City Hall. Controversy erupted anew, however, as the congregation of the Church of the Holy Trinity exhibited an increased willingness to fight the demolition plans for its church. Eventually, the Eaton Centre plans were revised to save both Old City Hall and the church, and then revised further when Holy Trinity’s parishioners successfully fought to ensure that the new complex would not block all sunlight to the church. These amendments to the plans resulted in three significant changes to the proposed centre from the initial 1960s concept. First, the new Eaton’s store was shifted north to Dundas Street, as the new store would be too large to be accommodated in its traditional location on Queen Street (opposite its rival Simpson’s) due to the preservation of City Hall. This resulted in the mall being constructed with Eaton’s and Simpson’s acting as anchors at either end. The second significant change was the reduction in the size of the office component, so that the Eaton Centre project no longer represented an attempt to extend the City’s financial district north of Queen Street, as the Eaton Family had originally contemplated in the 1960s. Finally, the bulk of the centre was shifted east to the Yonge Street frontage, and the complex was designed so that it no longer had any frontage along Bay Street. Old City Hall and the Church were thus saved, as was the Salvation Army headquarters building by virtue of its location between the two other preserved buildings (although the Salvation Army building was eventually demolished in the late 1990s to make way for an Eaton Centre expansion)
