buildup
Senior Member
Clearly you have a heavy crush on Chief Planner Keesmat. I will respect that.
Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners
- Thread starter golodhendil
- Start date
Clearly you have a heavy crush on Chief Planner Keesmat. I will respect that.
buildup; the half-jokey condescension is getting boring and annoying, and is just a step away from trolling.
42
42
greenleaf
Senior Member
I was thinking the misogyny and questioning of her ability was the issue, not the condescension, but that's just me.
buildup
Senior Member
True, its just you. Much ink has been spilt attacking Mirvish, Gehry (including ad hominen attacks) as well as countless other architects. Many comments have targeted their talent, motivation and so forth. Its part of the territory. I think the reflexive, gallant leaping to the defense of Ms. Keesmat is patronizing to her.
MisterF
Senior Member
What if, for the sake of the argument, Mirvish had proposed something like this in the middle of Paris? If Paris turned it down based on its height as it inevitably would, would its reputation be tarnished because it didn't get the art gallery? Or would its reputation by approving it just for the art gallery? Now before everyone starts chanting "Toronto isn't Paris", the point is that a project has to be good planning and work for the site, art gallery or not. If the project is felt to be inappropriate for whatever reason, then an art gallery isn't going to make it suddenly work. That's like a woman staying in an abusive relationship because her husband buys her flowers.
I'm pretty much neutral on this project but some of the attacks on city staff here are just comical.
buildup
Senior Member
You've asked that I not say, "Paris isn't Toronto" - but it isn't. You could just as well have used Chicago or New York as analogies, where this would likely be welcomed in the right spot.
Secondly, I think it does work for the site.
Secondly, I think it does work for the site.
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
I'm certainly not trying to micro-manage city planning.
A butt ugly 900 foot building at Gerrard & Yonge and ruining superb architecture like Sutton Place Hotel is well within the city planning department's comfort zone (and offer nothing of cultural benefit). And yet MG gets the gears. Something is wrong with this picture. In case anyone hasn't noticed...this city isn't exactly being run by the wisest geniuses of all time.
A butt ugly 900 foot building at Gerrard & Yonge and ruining superb architecture like Sutton Place Hotel is well within the city planning department's comfort zone (and offer nothing of cultural benefit). And yet MG gets the gears. Something is wrong with this picture. In case anyone hasn't noticed...this city isn't exactly being run by the wisest geniuses of all time.
argus
Active Member
First, these are two different projects in two different parts of the city. Second, the issues raised at the city do not revolve around the proposed aesthetics of the design (which is still a work in progress). Third, like or dislike of a design is subjective. Some on this forum love what's on Gerrard on Yonge; others - including myself - do not find that it lives up to its name.
It's hard to understand why a trio of, say, 60 floor Gehry-designed building can't be a success. Why only an 80+ floor set of structures? I'm curious about that?
It's hard to understand why a trio of, say, 60 floor Gehry-designed building can't be a success. Why only an 80+ floor set of structures? I'm curious about that?
buildup
Senior Member
Since 80 was originally proposed, why not 80?
Why is 60 the new comfort zone?
80-100 floor buildings are sprouting like crazy south of Central Park, and no-one seems frightened.
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
But it goes to the "precedent setting" issue at hand....Aura certainly set a height precedent for that area of downtown (more so than MG I'd say) and I didn't see city planning having a fit over it. In fact...they gave it a height increase!! That's how concerned they were about it. LOL
My point exactly...it should matter. And it should matter a lot. What we need to get rid of is the politics as a factor.
Yes...I'm sure it will make headlines across the globe. And the huge cultural draw of the Bed, Bath and Beyond will put Toronto on the cultural map for sure.
That flawed reasoning has already been dealt with too many times already.
E.B.
Active Member
Wouldn't it be great if the OMB gave the go-ahead & M/G ruined their reputations by pulling-off the greatest bait & switch caper in the history of Toronto. They could use building supplies from Home Depot & IKEA. Then the great Kismet, I mean Keesmat, could say I told you so. We'd all say why, oh why, didn't we listen to her.
isaidso
Senior Member
The proportions will change, the concept will be compromised, and for what? I realize they couldn't possibly be this petty, but it comes across as saying 'no' for the sake of saying 'no' so that they can say that they're tough with developers. If height is the problem, chopping 70 floors off these accomplishes that. Chopping 20 is pointless.
A developer should be able to go as tall as they want in areas like this. What matters is how buildings meet the street, quality, and the city investing in the infrastructure to meet demands place upon it. 80 floors? Honestly, I wouldn't care if they were double that height as long as these other issues were dealt with to a satisfactory degree.
They need to have a better reason for turning down height than not liking tall buildings or disliking shade. If that's all they can come up with, there's 3,850,000 square miles of other real estate in this country that should suit them fine.
Last edited:
adma
Superstar
Boy, all this Keesmaat-bashing sets a "para dime" for well-meaning naivete in the guise of sophistication...
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
I can think of one Keesmaat apologist for whom that description is far more fitting.
We didn't have to worry about the bait & switch with Aura....they offered up a 900 foot POS...and that's exactly what they delivered. In fact, city planning rewarded it with an increase.
There's a moral to this story...and I'm not comfortable with it.
Last edited:
buildup
Senior Member
re:MMM+G (mini, modified M+G)
I will cowtow to the edict to be nice to Ms. Keesmat. Hopefully I can continue to compliment or criticize abilities, qualifications, motivations, and views of other public officials who are impacting our city.
If this thing gets strangled it will be humilating watching the scurrying for political cover, "but can't we still have a sawed-off basterdized version, plus your art collection? Remember those helpful design suggestions from local residents and focus groups? Will Mr. Peabody still get his 8 floor vertical vegetable garden?"
M+G should just pack the thing to Manhattan where, strangely, they seem to find space for these things. And the art collection.
The NYT can print a follow up piece on their major story on M+G when it was announced.
If this doesn't happen, at the end of cycle, we say - well it was a nice run, we got a few very good buildings, good buildings, and bad buildings. But precious few anyone will talk about. Lets take some chances - lets even risk the dreaded 'bait and switch' which some perceive as a risk particular to Frank Mirvish and Frank Gehry.
I will cowtow to the edict to be nice to Ms. Keesmat. Hopefully I can continue to compliment or criticize abilities, qualifications, motivations, and views of other public officials who are impacting our city.
If this thing gets strangled it will be humilating watching the scurrying for political cover, "but can't we still have a sawed-off basterdized version, plus your art collection? Remember those helpful design suggestions from local residents and focus groups? Will Mr. Peabody still get his 8 floor vertical vegetable garden?"
M+G should just pack the thing to Manhattan where, strangely, they seem to find space for these things. And the art collection.
The NYT can print a follow up piece on their major story on M+G when it was announced.
If this doesn't happen, at the end of cycle, we say - well it was a nice run, we got a few very good buildings, good buildings, and bad buildings. But precious few anyone will talk about. Lets take some chances - lets even risk the dreaded 'bait and switch' which some perceive as a risk particular to Frank Mirvish and Frank Gehry.
Last edited: