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

artdaily.org is carrying the story, ....http://www.artdaily.org/index.asp?int_sec=2&int_new=60781#.UR7zlx04uSo

and a reminder of what the podium could be.....Amazing, and I hope we get it...

gehry-2.jpg
 
Big Daddy said:
The OMB gets involved when differing parties cannot get past their political squabbling to make an intelligent, informed decision.

Local groups often don't like their decisions because they tend to favour a resolution that is more fact based than opinion and conjecture.
Click to expand...

The OMB doesn't "get involved." An interested party has to apply to the OMB. You presume "politics," but don't state what you think that politics is. Prior to visiting an appeals body like the OMB, a decision has to be rendered, as in, for example, the Committee of Adjustments.


Automation Gallery said:
Boloney, that is all manufactured by the anti-develoment folks... when they cant get their way.
Click to expand...

Of course, Automation Gallery is so blinded and so totally ga-ga over the prospect of tall buildings that he is oblivious to the fact that the city is populated by human beings and not by the singular aspirations of developers focussed on marketing product. Automation Gallery is oblivious, or utterly disinterested in, the idea of a real city-building effort - that is, building a well-planned and humane place to live for people. For him, people are just in the way, an obstruction to his development fantasies. While he might fawn over sunless street caverns, and foam over soopertalls, you won't catch him living in them or even among them. He resides in Parkdale, far from the people he derides as nimby's or as anti-development.

It's the neutron bomb approach development: give him the buildings, but spare him the people who might want to have a say about them. God forbid they get in the way of his predilection for tall over all else.
 
gristle said:
Of course, Automation Gallery is so blinded and so totally ga-ga over the prospect of tall buildings that he is oblivious to the fact that the city is populated by human beings and not by the singular aspirations of developers focussed on marketing product. Automation Gallery is oblivious, or utterly disinterested in, the idea of a real city-building effort - that is, building a well-planned and humane place to live for people. For him, people are just in the way, an obstruction to his development fantasies. While he might fawn over sunless street caverns, and foam over soopertalls, you won't catch him living in them or even among them. He resides in Parkdale, far from the people he derides as nimby's or as anti-development.

It's the neutron bomb approach development: give him the buildings, but spare him the people who might want to have a say about them. God forbid they get in the way of his predilection for tall over all else.
Click to expand...

Hold on! You're violating the DtTO principle of urban-message-board etiquette, as per the Trump thread:

Sorry to deflate your ego just a little bit, but aesthetics are entirely subjective. I should have every right to place Trump in My list of Toronto's all time most aesthetically pleasing buildings without being called ignorant.
Click to expand...

Which isn't just about the inclusion on such a list, but *how* one includes things on such a list. I mean, no right to call *anyone* ignorant, even if they happen to use blatantly asinine and philistine logic in order to arrive at their opinions. The Wild West of architectural judgment. (i.e. it's less about DtTO's praise of Trump, than about his blithe brush-off of University College, Osgoode Hall, etc)

Nobody should criticize any fellow poster, anytime. Everyone should just "have their say". And in this context, a Chris Hume or Lisa Rochon would be as inappropriate as a teacher at a high school house party...I guess...
 
The other issue with the OMB is that developers have the deep pockets to hire Bay Street lawyers, "experts" on planning etc. That is a significant advantage against local community groups. That may be one reason for the perception that the OMB is pro-developer. It is very difficult for community groups to raise sufficient funds to hire experienced counsel to make good legal arguments in support of their position.

As for the picture posted of the podium - has the design changed? I thought there were supposed to be three towers?
Anyways with all due respect for Gehry - I just don't get it. It looks like a mess with toilet paper strewn around the towers. I don't see how it makes it an attractive pedestrian experience. Surely we can do better?
 
The OMB does seem to care about the externalities of development. There was a tall condo proposed for the Beaches that would have gone up right on the waterfront, looked incredibly out of place, and blocked probably 300-500 people's view of the water, and OMB did not let it go forward. There was massive community protest that probably helped their decision.
 
rpeters said:
The OMB does seem to care about the externalities of development. There was a tall condo proposed for the Beaches that would have gone up right on the waterfront, looked incredibly out of place, and blocked probably 300-500 people's view of the water, and OMB did not let it go forward. There was massive community protest that probably helped their decision.
Click to expand...

They also rejected big-box store plans in Leslieville that had many at city council undecided ..........OMB rejects big-box plans in Leslieville
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2009/03/05/omb_rejects_bigbox_plans_in_leslieville.html
Also Kensington Market big box development etc. etc.etc.....http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/12/20/kensington-market-development-omb/

I doubt they are these monsters that some here tend to classify them as:eek:
 
marsh said:
The other issue with the OMB is that developers have the deep pockets to hire Bay Street lawyers, "experts" on planning etc.
Click to expand...

Actually (and I know this from various heritage cases and the like), a scary lot of the time, the air-quote "experts" really are experts--that is, they could be just as capable of arguing for the other side...if it were the other side hiring them, that is. So, it's another way of saying they're "on the take"--hey, it's a living.

"Experts"-in-quotes makes me think more of professional debunkers and Scopes-trial contrarians.
 
I'd like to see a list of recent OMB decisions that went for the side of developers and what has resulted from these decisions.
Which projects that were most hotly contested by a community that eventually went ahead?
What was the biggest mistake made by the board for a community?
 
marsh said:
As for the picture posted of the podium - has the design changed? I thought there were supposed to be three towers?
Anyways with all due respect for Gehry - I just don't get it. It looks like a mess with toilet paper strewn around the towers. I don't see how it makes it an attractive pedestrian experience. Surely we can do better?
Click to expand...

My thoughts exactly. The more I see and think about this project, the less I want it to be realized. Unless the Great Man can come up with something that he didn't pull from his bag of overused gimmicks, I would rather the city not be stuck with something that we'll come to regret and be unable to modify in any way.
 
Last edited:
marsh said:
As for the picture posted of the podium - has the design changed? I thought there were supposed to be three towers?
Click to expand...

There is three towers still. This is the podium for the two towers between John Street and Duncan St (Ed Mirvish Way)

There's another tower being built east of Duncan Street beside the Royal Alexandra Theatre
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top