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

[Tewder]

To say otherwise is to fundamentally misunderstand what planning is and, frankly what architecture is. You seem to think it's the exact same thing as sculpture, and it is not. That's not "myopic," it's just a fact. If you don't like it, you can offer to represent Gehry and see if the Guggenheim wants to take on a maquette of these condominiums.

I do hope you see the irony in your post.

Again, that's the difference between architecture and other arts. Van Gogh didn't add more paint to a canvas because he knew it would generate a higher price at Christie's, but Mirvish does add more floors to make more money.

I'm not sure I understand how the profit motive negates something being art or 'artistic'? At UT we often lament the 'cheapening' and the banality of design and architecture it generates… and isn't it the profit motive that often leads to the cheapening? In a case such as this if height ensures the quality of the building, makes the quality of the building financially feasible, isn't it to be encouraged?

Oh, and this bears posting here
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/life...ry-come-on-a-tour-of-toronto/article16364157/

To be fair, wasn't it already demonstrated how those comments were taken out of context?

 

[Juma]

Thought this was neat

I stumbled across this image depicting the evolution of the sketch models for the Beekman Street Tower in Manhattan.

I found it interesting that there was a little similarity between some of the early stages of concept and the towers proposed

 

[adma]

It sounds like a group of re known individuals who could probably design their own condo project just fine.

However, it's their mandate that irks me. They must come back with something that greatly alters this project or they will be deemed to have "failed".

It's a ridiculous notion to ask a group of peers to substantially redo another artists work. Who's the "architect" now?

If this were being proposed in Mississauga, everyone would ask "why can't we get that kind of project here"?

In hind sight, Mirvish should have just used the same two or three local architects everyone is using, propose some more City Place towers, keep his art and he would likely be under construction by now.

Speaking of Mississauga, said "re known individuals" would likely shred you the way that Hazel McCallion shredded Ford at the ice storm meeting.

Yeah, the Big Daddys and Automation Galleries being the figurative Ford + Fennell hands-up here.

Oh, and I don't know who the "everyone" who'd ask "who can't we get that kind of project here" would be--I think there'd just as well be a non-snide "good for Mississauga" sentiment, just that it was "good for Mississauga" that they scored an international-award-winning Postmodern city hall scheme in the 1980s, or that they scored Marilyn more recently...

 

[buildup]

TJ, I'm not sure I agree that every project requires compromise, although many do.

I'm also confident Toronto is over the hump in respecting our architectural heritage, there isn't any risk of unrestrained demolition as in the past. We have a lot of facadism (which is fine) and building behind and above pre-existing stock.

But the idea of a clean slate is appealing to me in this case since the entire neighbourhood is already tall.

 

[verticalvillage]

TJ, I'm not sure I agree that every project requires compromise, although many do.

I'm also confident Toronto is over the hump in respecting our architectural heritage, there isn't any risk of unrestrained demolition as in the past. We have a lot of facadism (which is fine) and building behind and above pre-existing stock.

But the idea of a clean slate is appealing to me in this case since the entire neighbourhood is already tall.

What kind of changes do you think will be brought to the proposal?

 

[Automation Gallery]

What kind of changes do you think will be brought to the proposal?

CHOP, CHOP, CHOP,..lol

 

[johnwood]

one big difference between nyc and toronto is that nyc has a beautiful skyline that they can be proud of while toronto has a ugly skyline that people think they are proud of.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

"Toronto has an ugly skyline"

Must be why it's consistently cited as one of the best...

 

[yyzer]

An "altered" version is "better' because it's democratic. I'm not talking about a "building designed by committee," in the broad sense but what I am talking about is taking the amazing and ambitious thing this project seeks to do (along with putting money in Mirvish's pocket) and making sure it doesn't have negative impacts for the City of Toronto. It's not a crazy idea. Again, it's kind of the basis of having planning rules, a city council, even the OMB...It's because we live in a society where we don't defer to the whim of a singular powerful or wealthy person. A democracy, in other words.

What on earth is "democratic" about a 10 member 'expert' panel meddling with this design, when none of the members were elected by the public to do so? If you really subscribe to the idea of 'democracy', then the approval of these towers should be put to public referendum, and not decided by an unelected body.

If you really mean what you say, then all of Toronto planning guidelines should be put to a public vote, and not decided internally within the planning department. And guidelines for heritage designation should also be put to the public's vote. Each property suggested for heritage designation should be voted on by the citizens of Toronto - correct? Otherwise, it's not democratic. I believe none of these issues have ever been addressed by the rule of democracy, except for city council rubber stamping what was recommended by the bureaucrats.

Why don't you say what you really mean? That certain unelected, bureaucratic, special interest groups, each with their own agenda, have problems with this proposal, as it breaks their existing rules, which were created in secret, internally, and were never subject to any democratic vote or acceptance by the public.

Otherwise, don't insult the intelligence of UT forumers, by waiving the flag of "democracy". This is syllogistic nonsense at its worst.

 

[Lenser]

one big difference between nyc and toronto is that nyc has a beautiful skyline that they can be proud of while toronto has a ugly skyline that people think they are proud of.

Nicely incendiary - but rubbish all the same.

 

[Tewder]

one big difference between nyc and toronto is that nyc has a beautiful skyline that they can be proud of while toronto has a ugly skyline that people think they are proud of.

I absolutely love NYC's skyline. I also love Toronto's iconic skyline from the lake, and believe it is one of the most amazing urban sites to be seen in North America, heck anywhere. Fact.

 

[adma]

Why don't you say what you really mean? That certain unelected, bureaucratic, special interest groups, each with their own agenda, have problems with this proposal, as it breaks their existing rules, which were created in secret, internally, and were never subject to any democratic vote or acceptance by the public.

And everyone on Council but Ford, Ford, and Del Grande, uh, "enabled" said expert panel. Get the picture?

Otherwise, don't insult the intelligence of UT forumers, by waiving the flag of "democracy". This is syllogistic nonsense at its worst.

Though when we're talking about the Big Daddys and Automation Gallerys lunkheadedly tilting against the "expert panel" windmill, said "intelligence" comes awfully close to Libertrollian "I can think for myself, thank you" logic.

But hey; that's what you get in an era where a whole culture of so-called "urban thinking" has been generated exclusively within the closed loop of (real or suspended) adolescent skyscraper/new-development fanboydom, to the point that *everyone* within such an "expert panel" registers as "duh, we don't know them" elitist pointy-heads...

 

[urbandreamer]

17 January 2014: This is what we're yakking about, right?

An old warehouse with a Timmie's on board.

Jeez, I think it's time for a double double.

You may want to look up on your way out

I drink my Timmie's black thank you very much. And I like old brick.

 

[TheTigerMaster]

I wish it were restored to its natural brick colour. I've never been much of a fan of painted brick.

 

[waterloowarrior]

What on earth is "democratic" about a 10 member 'expert' panel meddling with this design, when none of the members were elected by the public to do so? If you really subscribe to the idea of 'democracy', then the approval of these towers should be put to public referendum, and not decided by an unelected body.

If you really mean what you say, then all of Toronto planning guidelines should be put to a public vote, and not decided internally within the planning department. And guidelines for heritage designation should also be put to the public's vote. Each property suggested for heritage designation should be voted on by the citizens of Toronto - correct? Otherwise, it's not democratic. I believe none of these issues have ever been addressed by the rule of democracy, except for city council rubber stamping what was recommended by the bureaucrats.

Why don't you say what you really mean? That certain unelected, bureaucratic, special interest groups, each with their own agenda, have problems with this proposal, as it breaks their existing rules, which were created in secret, internally, and were never subject to any democratic vote or acceptance by the public.

Otherwise, don't insult the intelligence of UT forumers, by waiving the flag of "democracy". This is syllogistic nonsense at its worst.

the Official Plan, zoning by-law, and heritage designation were all voted on by Council. Design guidelines are all adopted by Council. The panel (which appointed by an elected city council) will make a recommendation, Council will still make the decision