Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners

It's been said before and i will say it again. It completely undermines the project to slap on some gutted facade and pretend it's heritage preservation.
 
Then we'll have to see how Gehry treats the facades. The final design is still by him, and I have full confidence that he can integrate the heritage buildings in an unique manner.
 
junctionist said:
Lots of people here support heritage preservation. If Mirvish and Gehry don't get their way to build the project in its current iteration, I doubt that anyone will consider demolishing these buildings. To see Mirvish and Gehry fail to destroy these heritage buildings with their ambitious proposal would not motivate developers to propose demolishing them for second-rate developments. When we keep the heritage laws strong, these destructive development proposals subside. When the heritage laws were created in the 1970s, the practice of buying up entire city blocks with many historic buildings and then levelling the blocks for a single modern project declined considerably. Then came a flurry of heritage restoration projects in the 1970s-1980s.
.
Click to expand...

With all due respect junction, it's pretty naïve to believe that this block will not be developed. If sold, the cost of the land is far greater than what the existing structures can return on investment. I am confident that there will be some sort of façade treatment here by Mirvish. Make no mistake about it though, these buildings will not exist in their current form. There is precedent set with facadectomy's throughout the city, so there is absolutely nothing the city can do about saving these buildings, as long as the developer retains the facades.
Say goodbye to this block, its days are numbered....
 
junctionist said:
A lot of developers will see the Mirvish-Gehry proposal is a way to test the waters to see if you can override various legitimate planning regulations and laws by bundling flashy architecture and some extra public amenities. The second-rate developers won't get Gehry to design their buildings; they'll just give P+S a better budget, and they'll get approvals because this development will set the precedent that heritage can be disregarded if you're proposing unique architecture.
Click to expand...

But isn't that the point? To ensure that if the city is losing something, as will happen from time to time in a vital city, that it gets back more than it lost? In this case losing some designated properties but insisting on (exceptional) public amentities and exceptional architecure? City Council can say 'no' any time it wants if the trade-off isnt attractive.
 
Toronto has already lost so many great buildings. These need to stay to send a clear message. The era of massive destruction is over at least one would hope... These towers are great. I just hope Gehry will be willing to give it some thought and come up with a creative and innovative solution that would incorporate these buildings without compromising the original design. It can be done with a bit of goodwill and imagination.
 
buildup said:
But isn't that the point? To ensure that if the city is losing something, as will happen from time to time in a vital city, that it gets back more than it lost? In this case losing some designated properties but insisting on (exceptional) public amentities and exceptional architecure? City Council can say 'no' any time it wants if the trade-off isnt attractive.
Click to expand...

In this case, it's not an either-or situation like you so deliciously like to compare this to, but a request that the plans be tweaked so that this can be a win-win situation.
 
skyrise said:
With all due respect junction, it's pretty naïve to believe that this block will not be developed. If sold, the cost of the land is far greater than what the existing structures can return on investment. I am confident that there will be some sort of façade treatment here by Mirvish. Make no mistake about it though, these buildings will not exist in their current form. There is precedent set with facadectomy's throughout the city, so there is absolutely nothing the city can do about saving these buildings, as long as the developer retains the facades.
Say goodbye to this block, its days are numbered....
Click to expand...

The strong preservation regime will dictate what gets built based on public policy. The buildings provide valuable office space and will be valued for what they are: highly functional buildings in the most desirable part of the city. If the preservation regome is kept strong, then the buildings will be preserved. New development will happen around them.
 
jje1000 said:
In this case, it's not an either-or situation like you so deliciously like to compare this to, but a request that the plans be tweaked so that this can be a win-win situation.
Click to expand...

Fair enough but most of my delicious responses have been towards people calling for more than tweaks.
 
It's hard to believe that planning staff are blown away by all the crappy building proposals I've seen them approve.
Click to expand...

It's also hard to believe that they pick the best development Toronto has ever seen to mount its biggest battle against.

Toronto...you can be a strange bird.

Oh well, at lest there will be plenty of fodder for for the third Unbuilt Toronto.
 
Planning staff are reviewing the height/density of the plan, not the design. The purpose of the renders and designs are to try to demonstrate that the increased zoning provisions can work on the site and potential issues such as heritage and traffic arising from the increased provisions can be addressed. The purpose of the City's renders was to demonstrate a reduced scale and less heritage impact that would better meet City policy, not to design the project for them. Once approvals are given Kirkor, G&C, or any other firm could design the project, or propose something on a nearby site and use this as "context."
 
Last edited:
^Good, informative post. Unfortunately the superfans of this proposal won't accept the logic.
 
argus said:
^Good, informative post. Unfortunately the superfans of this proposal won't accept the logic.
Click to expand...

DEFINITION

su.per.fan

/su.PER.Fan/

noun


1. a resident of a city bereft of innovative architecture who responds enthusiastically to a proposal certain to garner positive local and world wide attention.
2. a resident capable of accepting trade-offs in exchange for such innovative architecture
2. a resident capable of recognizing rare opportunities to develop innovative, large scale developments occur when architects, developers, market conditions are temporarily aligned
 
argus said:
^Good, informative post. Unfortunately the superfans of this proposal won't accept the logic.
Click to expand...

That wasn't "logic" that was an opinion. There are many opinions about this project such as, it is a Rare opportunity to have a forward thinking, affluent local developer hiring a world re known architect to build an iconic addition to the city's urban, cultural and education scene.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top