Toronto East Harbour | 214.2m | 65s | Cadillac Fairview | Adamson

[Northern Light]

What's/Who's OMA? And, why is it so good/bad that they're creating the master plan?

This is OMA

http://www.world-architects.com/en/oma/

This would be the most well-known partner in OMA: Rem Koolhaas

**


I was told they're working with the New York office of OMA.

**

Also this is strictly the master-planning stage, not individual building detail-architecture.

That will come later once the plan is done and a phasing strategy settled on.

He indicated they had picked anyone for that stage, but said design would be important, and that the site is too large to have just one architect, they want some variation.

 

[Adjei]

Good to have some international architects involved.

 

[CapitalSeven]

That's certainly a radical and visionary document. But realistically all that will carry through from the transferium will be a swirl motif on the bus shelters along the extended Broadview (I say bus because there won't be money to extend the streetcar). After all, what's left from many years of visioning about what to do with the Gardiner East is (a) tear down 2 km of it or (b) leave it exactly as it is but knock off a half mile of ramps at one end and replace them with a third of a mile of ramps where a neighborhood was supposed to go.

(a) is nice enough but essentially could have been planned in 6 minutes, while (b) is still being called a hybrid, but really it's a bait and switch where reverting to doing almost nothing is dressed up as doing something. How is 90% status quo and 10% demolition a hybrid? To call it a cop-out is an insult to mediocrities everywhere.

Any ideas that were creative, clever, innovative, bold, or were really in some way a hybrid were eliminated or never discussed.

 

[Edward Skira]

Good to see the OMA involved.

 

[Riverdale Rink Rat]

Recall this blue sky proposal by OMA as part of the early Gardiner process?

http://www.gardinereast.ca/sites/default/files//designideas/Remove_OMA+AMO_Booklet.pdf

Time to revisit it in the context of this site.

AoD

That is a great read. One of my favorite parts, though, is how much of it has actually already come to fruition. Check out the picture on page 14 of the concrete pad that was Queen's Quay East less than 10 years ago. It's now Sugar Beach, Corus, GBC, Sherbourne, with a buildout to Parliament slip in the making. Amazing!

Or the 'blue skying' of the PanAm village, which is now in place...

I'm going to cross-post to the Gardiner east thread -- I'd like to see what the 'remove' haters think about a plan that has a short tunnel -- it would eliminate one or two stoplights. Don't think it'll change many minds, but maybe?

 

[CDL.TO]

I'll admit I'm confused. Can someone please clarify why the hybrid or remove options are deemed necessary to allowing this project to move ahead?

 

[Northern Light]

I'll admit I'm confused. Can someone please clarify why the hybrid or remove options are deemed necessary to allowing this project to move ahead?

Essentially access (Though removing the Gardiner certainly helps w/marketing too).

The proposal is 12,000,000 sq feet of employment lands. Currently there is only one access point, that is off Don Roadway, just north of Lake Shore.

While there is a proposed road, through lands not owned by First Gulf, which would access to Booth; that clearly won't allow for vast volumes of traffic.

The Broadview extension becomes necessary, as a minimum of one point of entry from both the north and south.

On the south side, that requires clearing the current railway, then Lake Shore Westbound; then Lake Shore Eastbound, and weaving through the columns of the Gardiner as well.

Put simply they don't believe they can create that w/o removing the Gardiner at the south end of the site.

The removal of the large ramps to the DVP is less of an issue, however, if done properly could enhance the site w/water views, and a pedestrian bridge linking to the Don Trail.

 

[CDL.TO]

Thanks.

I was considering that it might have something to do with the access issue. But looking at Streetview it seems to me like there shouldn't be any issues with creating an intersection with Lake Shore at Saulter (and the railway would have to go whether the Gardiner stays or goes anyway).

Even if they had to move a column, that would surely be cheaper than demolition and building new ramps at Cherry, no?

Am I wrong?

 

[dowlingm]

For me, extending the streetcar (as part of a Broadview extension) should be a non-negotiable requirement for the GG project generally (as we have seen on QQE the build first transit later alternative is a recipe for weaselling out down the road). The streetcar is after all how local people, those who will be inconvenienced by the increased activity in the area, will be able to access jobs and not just people speeding in the highway and down the GO line.

 

[rdaner]

I have been thinking about OMA's involvement with this site and wanted to post images of their work to help give some structure as to what to expect with built form. Very exciting and 'next stage' for Toronto.

 

[Armour]

Great looking stuff. How many years away is construction?

 

[adHominem]

I'm a go out on a limb and say that we won't get anything that looks anything like any of those things. (As much as it would be awesome to have the Don Lands be dominated by that Enki Bilal-lookin' shard thing.)

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

I have to say I am never quite enamoured by the OMA aesthetics - their ideas (often big) are more remarkable.

AoD

 

[interchange42]

And of course, a sampling of their completed works would be more telling than their theoretical work.

42

 

[AlvinofDiaspar]

Notes from the June public consultation meeting/workshop:

http://www.hardystevenson.com/admin/pdf/Community Workshop 3.pdf

Main interesting bit - no residential component whatsoever.

AoD