Toronto Aura at College Park | 271.87m | 78s | Canderel | Graziani + Corazza

freshcutgrass said:
I'm blaming everybody. But you can't fire everybody...especially elected people who hired Keesmaat.

But you can fire Keesmaat.

This POS gets a pass...and then a height and density BONUS (same height and density issues as MG).
Mirvish-Gehry project gets big thumbs down

Something is clearly working against our best interests.
Click to expand...

What does Jennifer Keesmaat (hired Summer 2012) have to do with a settlement at the OMB in 2007? Also City Planning staff recommended refusal of Aura http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/agendas/committees/te/te060913/it023.pdf
 
waterloowarrior said:
What does Jennifer Keesmaat (hired Summer 2012) have to do with a settlement at the OMB in 2007?
Click to expand...

Nothing.

What does that have to do with firing her?

Seems people have a problem following along. This is but an example of a certain ongoing state of affairs.

Funny thing that link of yours...read it and weep.



On August 15, 2006, Planning staff received subsequent correspondence from the applicant’s solicitor, which included a report from Robert Glover of Bousfields Inc., both dated August 15, 2005. In his letter, Mr. Bermingham states that the report from Bousfields was prepared in response to a request from City Planning staff for an urban design rationale for a building of 75 storeys. The report states “...a process to ensure that the height is supported by exemplary architecture. This process is underway with a panel comprised of Mr. Eberhards Zeidler and Mr. Rene Menkes. An invitation was extended to Gary Wright (Director, Community Planning) to have the City nominate a third eminent architect to the panel but there has been no indication of an interest by the City in doing so.” Subject to Council’s consideration of this report and its recommendations, City staff do not believe that a panel that focuses on the proposal’s architecture as the means for support without better adherence or respect for Council’s in-force planning approvals is advisable.
Click to expand...
 
waterloowarrior said:
What does Jennifer Keesmaat (hired Summer 2012) have to do with a settlement at the OMB in 2007? Also City Planning staff recommended refusal of Aura http://www.toronto.ca/legdocs/2006/agendas/committees/te/te060913/it023.pdf
Click to expand...

The parallels being drawn between Aura and Mirvish are well founded. Keesmaat was at the helm, and practically spearheaded the anti-Mirvish campaign. She is not worthy of being in the position that she's in, that's for sure. She is far too small minded and shortsighted.
 
Last edited:
freshcutgrass said:
Nothing.

What does that have to do with firing her?

Seems people have a problem following along. This is but an example of a certain ongoing state of affairs.

Funny thing that link of yours...read it and weep.
Click to expand...

Zoning and design (site plan) are two different processes. It sounds like for Aura city staff didn't want to participate in a process justifying greater height based on good design, since there isn't a way to enforce this. Same principle applies to M+G. You can't say it should get more height because it's a Gehry. The developer could turn around and design with Kirkor once they had height approvals.
 
DtTO said:
The parallels being drawn between Aura and Mirvish are well founded. Keesmaat was at the helm, and practically spearheaded the anti-Mirvish campaign. She is not worthy of being in the position that she's in, that's for sure. She is far too small minded and shortsighted.
Click to expand...

Planning staff recommended in favour of building the tallest building in Canada on the site and somehow they are anti-Mirvish and small minded?

Not to mention that Aura and M+G are different sites with different constraints, in different years, different types of applications (originally), with different planning policies/secondary plans in place, different staff, different council, different legislation in effect etc.
 
Last edited:
I see the lack of design/quality here as somewhat organic, it reflects the values of the city (as they were several years ago when this pile was conceived, at least). It's just a bigger and more prominent representation of them. What's proposed to happen at the M/G site is an exception not the rule, driven by the vision of developers with a legacy agenda. How often does this really happen?

This latest building boom has been about speculators and investors looking to maximize profits quick in what was a grossly underdeveloped market. With certain notable exceptions this has not produced good results... and the ugly 'gravy-obssessed' attitude at City Hall only added insult to injury. They traded away all kinds of height bonuses etc. for pennies, letting developers get away with ugly cheap designs and token community benefits. Clearly this hasn't worked. Change is needed, and I rather like Torontovibe's suggestion that there needs to be more requirements with respect to quality and design.
 
Tewder said:
What's proposed to happen at the M/G site is an exception not the rule, driven by the vision of developers with a legacy agenda. How often does this really happen?
Click to expand...

The fact that the current planning dept can't grasp this is or be able to differentiate it from any other proposal is the kind of failure I'm referring to. I mean, we have such a dumb bunch down there, that they don't even have the common sense to grab the low hanging fruit when it presents itself.


Tewder said:
... and the ugly 'gravy-obssessed' attitude at City Hall only added insult to injury. They traded away all kinds of height bonuses etc. for pennies, letting developers get away with ugly cheap designs and token community benefits.
Click to expand...

Yes...with Aura the developer got increased height and density, and we managed to negotiate no architectural excellence or public realm improvements (Barbara Ann Scott Park will be less than what it was). There's a failure there you simply can't wash away with the OMB excuse.

But the problem with "gravy-obsession" goes much deeper. Why do we have Keesmaat in the first place? Ford appointed his ally Milczyn to the chair of the planning and growth management committee. When Wright quit, they couldn't attract anyone to take the job. That's do to 2 factors...by late 2012, who in their right mind would want to work for the Ford administration, where if your opinion does not jive with certain political agendas, you will be fired (Webster). The other is that being cheap means you don't want to offer salaries to attract the real talent. Even Milczyn himself is on record as sayings "the city’s pay scale was the real obstacle to attracting top talent".

At first I thought going to the private sector to recruit was a good idea. But Keesmaat took the job because of her ego, and it's her ego that has clearly gotten in the way.
 
I have a bad feeling that the light feature will suffer the same fate as the Trump Tower. Hopefully someone on here can shed some "light" on the situation. (couldn't help myself)
 
You have a bad feeling? Does that just stem from general ignorance, or do you have something more concrete you can pin that on?

The lights aren't on yet because the building's not done yet. Lights are the kind of things that get turned on once everything's complete and the developer is celebrating.

Here's hoping they complete Trump someday too.
 
WiddleBittyKitty said:
You have a bad feeling? Does that just stem from general ignorance, or do you have something more concrete you can pin that on?

The lights aren't on yet because the building's not done yet. Lights are the kind of things that get turned on once everything's complete and the developer is celebrating.

Here's hoping they complete Trump someday too.
Click to expand...

Dude it was a joke... lighten up. No need to be calling people ignorant as you'll notice there are a lot of people asking about the light feature on this forum.
 
Thanks for the pictures Marcanadian.
As your pictures demonstrate, for the most part, this building will bleed into the urban background, noticed by some, and be a landmark for others.

The biggest shame to me is the poor state of the lower levels.
 
^ I think my biggest head scratch about the podium for this building is their decision to go for lighter stone as opposed to darker stone, it seems really out of place.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top