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

In order to fulfill this vision, all the buildings to the west of the Royal Alex will be replaced with Gehry's new architecture.
Click to expand...

In order to fulfill this vision - and build the 5 acres of underground parking required for three supertall condos - all the buildings to the west of the Royal Alex will be replaced with Gehry's new architecture.
 
Actually (and maybe this is what I meant by "straight"), one thing I find about you is that your form of "pro heritage" is extremely, shall I say, "establishment".
Click to expand...

But as I've said (to deaf ears), is that you don't have enough information to form an opinion. Your GPS can't work on just one satellite.

And I love how you take this completely false and fabricated premise, and then go on to elaborate into total fictional/fantasy territory. Given enough time, I'm sure you will call me a Holocaust denier as well. All this smear campaign proves, is how dishonest you really are are.



look at it this way: if you'd still, today, advocate the half-round's demolition absolutely and without compunction, said grassroots would look at you kinda funny like you're a Monsanto apologist or something...
Click to expand...

Except I'm actually strongly in favour of preserving the half-round. Sorry...don't mean to spoil your fun, but if anyone who know's me listened to anyone try to describe me as the corporate, strait, tight-assed establishment type....you'd be laughed out of existence.
 
Do you work for the developer?
Click to expand...

No, but don't let truth or facts stand in your way.

Unless you plan on lowering yourself to adma's disingenuous form of discourse, I would be less interested in "me".
 
The one-liner putdowns are unworthy. A number of posts here have crossed over the line between heated discussion and ad hominem attacks. Keep the debate substantive or watch the hammer drop.

42
 
neubilder said:
And what if this project falls victim to a market downturn? This is an exciting proposal, but it's just a proposal and it's in the hands of private development interests and there is no guarantee of the outcome. The block could be leveled and another developer could take over if anything goes awry.

For all of the critics of these 'warehouses', they are no different from the celebrated 'warehouses' on King west of Spadina that Allied restored and converted. They too have the issue of entrances that are not at sidewalk level yet they have been made to engage with the street extremely well. These buildings were arguably the catalyst for the resurgence in popularity of King West as one of the most coveted districts in the city. These buildings were once ugly, drab white-painted eyesores that someone with less imagination might have torn down.
Click to expand...

Just like what it happened to One Bloor, first owned by Bazis with most striking design that many buyers lined up to own a masterpiece, then when it went downhill, Bazis sold to Great Gulf, with completely revamped design and I cannot even compare the first and last design. I could say the first one was the most ideal for One Bloor. It seems we do not have any desires or wishes the consumer world creating and simulating these worlds and lifestyles in which we have desires and wants and endless demands. We are supplied with our demands and economy happily functions ever after, keeping a steady graph line without many ups and downs that create economical disaster. Our developed Toronto as well functions just like we do, then Mirvish+Gehry finds well functioned for Toronto.

In Toronto we are not surrounded with the junk space but we are living in a junk space. I often look at the new buildings or suburban houses, which pose as "Victorian", "Georgian", etc. styles, implying a kind of quality, longevity, history, etc... where in fact these houses and buildings are quite the opposite of that which they are trying to communicate, they are made of "paper", efes system, drywall and hang bricks. We all know and we all buy them and build the foundations of our "new communities" around them. We hand around these hermetically white, brushed stainless steel and glass "lounges" just because the "wall paper" magazine (the name of the magazine being quite honest of its content) recommends as a valid, hip and cool place. Today we can buy a "life style" on a paper and happily live with a full subscription to it.

For true heritages, even tho it is difficult to understand Toronto's move to heritages fully due to the specific style of modernism Toronto wants to see, with which perhaps Toronto is trying to materialize the "junk". For example when we see loss of structure and expression of it, I think of many arched entrances around our city that are signifying a welcoming "threshold" and yet they are absolutely not structural and are made of efes system, stuccoed to a perfection giving you an impression of structural function. As well as many restoration jobs around the city which completely underestimate the typology, building's history and previous function, where only the facade is preserved and giant glass boxes are super imposed as volumes that disregard their own design, never mind the restoration of the existing buildings. One of great example is Princess Margaret Hospital on University Avenue south of College Street "restored" by Zeidler Roberts Partnership.
 
Somehow the padding does make it all more palatable…

but it is time for all involved to step back a bit, and yes that includes the attempted dissection of another's personality based only on scraps of evidence. We're not here to do forensic reconstructions of other members: it's resulting in some pseudo-science being practiced here.

Debate the issues, not each other.

42
 
neubilder:

You'd have to be living under a rock to know about Gehry's work and not know about that case. But how does it translate into the experience here, necessarily? Are you suggesting that it is an inevitability that there will be a bait and switch and if so, what evidence do you have to justify your scenario? Besides, I found it interesting that you didn't cite the example of Beekman Tower instead.

AoD
 
Last edited:
AlvinofDiaspar said:
neubilder:

You'd have to be living under a rock to know about Gehry's work and not know about that case. But how does it translate into the experience here, necessarily? Are you suggesting that it is an inevitability that there will be a bait and switch and if so, what evidence do you have to justify your scenario? Besides, I found it interesting that you didn't cite the example of Beekman Tower instead.

AoD
Click to expand...

Beekman, meaning that if we impose too many strictures on Gehry -- like heritage preservation -- then the podium will be a failure? That's what I worry about. Let this be a real Gehry building from top to bottom, if we are going to bear the costs of all this additional density.
 
AlvinofDiaspar said:
neubilder:

You'd have to be living under a rock to know about Gehry's work and not know about that case. But how does it translate into the experience here, necessarily? Are you suggesting that it is an inevitability that there will be a bait and switch and if so, what evidence do you have to justify your scenario? Besides, I found it interesting that you didn't cite the example of Beekman Tower instead.

AoD
Click to expand...

Toronto feels a bit like living under a rock sometimes, thanks for pointing it out - It's true that I'm not the all-seeing red-glowing eye of wisdom itself, but I try. How does it translate into the experience here you ask? There is an entire heritage designated block at stake, and Mirvish is using a starchitect to push through the biggest real-estate venture this city has ever known.
 
How does it translate into the experience here you ask? There is an entire heritage designated block at stake, and Mirvish is using a starchitect to push through the biggest real-estate venture this city has ever known.
Click to expand...

You're repeating what we all know, and you've said before. Just what facts and evidence can you marshal on the table that would suggest a bait and switch scheme at work here in this case? What you've just said about the Atlantic Yards does not illuminate that conjecture. Beyond that, you also have not demonstrated how your scenario is the default outcome when I've pointed out Beekman Tower as a counterexample - a project which have incidentally also provided significant community benefits.

AoD
 
Last edited:
Mirvish is being given free reign to cast aside heritage designations and height restrictions because he is who he is and because he hired Toronto's prodigal son to dazzle the masses. Exceptions that no ther developer would be given - until now - if the precedent is set. If you refuse to see this then I give up.
 
neubilder:

It isn't like a) developers haven't torn down or otherwise propose to "incorporate" heritage structures, b) went way above and beyond height restrictions and c) end up getting their way in the end (at the city or OMB). The only thing we haven't had a precedent for is someone hiring one of the greatest living architects to do all that, while providing a new university building and a publically accessible art gallery with the attendant collection of international significance. Certainly one would recognize it as an exceptional scenario, no?

Interestingly that's not what your initial assertion is about - you are specifically pointing to the possibility of bait and switch like with the Atlantic Yards, not how this case would set a precedent. Nice try switching channels in midstream when you can't show an iota of evidence while tasked to do so. I suppose you should just give up about now.

Now having said that, one should of course be a bit more circumspect in the interest of public good to ensure that the bait and switch scenario doesn't occur. The city and its' citizens are extending a lot of goodwill if and when the day they approve this project - certainly they have the right to ensure that goodwill isn't squandered.

AoD
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top