Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners
- Thread starter golodhendil
- Start date
salsa
Senior Member
The skyline has nothing to do with being world class. I haven't seen one single ranking that considers the skyline. That being said, lets hope those projects you mention get build.
buildup
Senior Member
Would you replace "skyline" with "monumental architecture" and still make that statement? Monumental Architecture is no guarantee of greatness but it is a necessary precondition.
syn
Senior Member
I agree with some aspects of your statement, but it's not as though Mirvish is going into this risk free.
DtTO
Active Member
adma
Superstar
Y'know...I'd invert that. Because if said citizenry puts all those interest-in-architecture eggs in the Great Architecture basket, IMO it actually betrays their airheaded incompetence in the guise of "enlightenment"--no different from the kinds of mouthbreathers who conclude that "Toronto hasn't got heritage, its old stuff ain't thousands of years old like the Acropolis". And when it comes to such mentalities, I'd actually fear the fate of so much "lesser" stuff out there--which is why, on balance, I'd have to conclude that the heritage movement of the 60s and 70s, in tandem with creeping Jane Jacobism, did more to engender a *healthy* interest in architecture and urban fabric--even in Toronto--than any modern-day starchitecture turn ever could.
So, in that spirit, rather than chasing/longing for Great Architecture in Toronto, it might be more disarmingly useful for them to develop a yen for the so-called humdrum and everyday and warts-and-all preexisting environments in places like London or Paris or NYC. Learn to appreciate them as Real Cities, rather than as dumb tourist bait....
Last edited:
Is Alex Bozikovic's contention that this project will make hundreds of millions of dollars for David Mirvish going to be repeated on UrbanToronto without being challenged?
This project is going to cost a lot more to build than the average owing to it's ever-changing and expensive cladding, floorplates, finishings, etc. The architect is more expensive than most too, much more in fact. Then there are the features in the podiums that have to be paid for: one being given free of charge to OCAD U, the other being turned into a large art gallery. After however many tens of thousands extra it's going to cost per unit to build those features, you'd then have to add on another $40,000 per unit on average to clear $100,000,000.
We're seeing luxury units languish on the market in Toronto. Trump, Shangri-La, Aura, the Ritz Carlton, 77 Charles West, and many more buildings have lots of million dollar units sitting unsold. This is such a large project, it has to be priced right to work. Sure a good number of people will pay a premium to live in M+G, but the state of the market at the moment does not favour the difference being that big, and definitely not on smaller suites: investors won't buy what they can't cover from renters (and Festival Tower showed that renters aren't normally willing to pay a premium for OTT buidings).
It comes down to this: Mirvish should make many millions on this project if it's priced right, and nothing if it's priced too high. Claiming he will make hundreds of millions? Silly talk.
42
This project is going to cost a lot more to build than the average owing to it's ever-changing and expensive cladding, floorplates, finishings, etc. The architect is more expensive than most too, much more in fact. Then there are the features in the podiums that have to be paid for: one being given free of charge to OCAD U, the other being turned into a large art gallery. After however many tens of thousands extra it's going to cost per unit to build those features, you'd then have to add on another $40,000 per unit on average to clear $100,000,000.
We're seeing luxury units languish on the market in Toronto. Trump, Shangri-La, Aura, the Ritz Carlton, 77 Charles West, and many more buildings have lots of million dollar units sitting unsold. This is such a large project, it has to be priced right to work. Sure a good number of people will pay a premium to live in M+G, but the state of the market at the moment does not favour the difference being that big, and definitely not on smaller suites: investors won't buy what they can't cover from renters (and Festival Tower showed that renters aren't normally willing to pay a premium for OTT buidings).
It comes down to this: Mirvish should make many millions on this project if it's priced right, and nothing if it's priced too high. Claiming he will make hundreds of millions? Silly talk.
42
E.B.
Active Member
As the project gets closer to the OMB, it sounds like tempers are starting to flair a little. In that vain, I have to say that these are only warehouses! their not maple leaf gardens, osgoode, massey hall etc.
The bell lightbox is only 3 yrs old & it has more heritage than the vast majority of what you call heritage.
I think Mies TD Centre is considered heritage? If not, then lets consider the warehouses as more important and just tear down TD. Saving heritage ( once again warehouses) at all costs is ridicules.
Btw, the globe article has it right, their will be some adjustments to the design but not the inclusion of these buildings. And this project is going to get done.
The bell lightbox is only 3 yrs old & it has more heritage than the vast majority of what you call heritage.
I think Mies TD Centre is considered heritage? If not, then lets consider the warehouses as more important and just tear down TD. Saving heritage ( once again warehouses) at all costs is ridicules.
Btw, the globe article has it right, their will be some adjustments to the design but not the inclusion of these buildings. And this project is going to get done.
urbandreamer
recession proof
^You consider the lightbox great architecture? Oh gosh, we are in trouble....
People forget that many of us have centuries of history in this town, that our ancestors laid out, designed and built these buildings. We are attached to our history thank you.
I actually like this proposal but I do see the only interesting part of King Street being slowly destroyed in the name of progress. The treatment at grade of the M+G proposal is very '60s-70s-style, very MINT-ish and honestly, very dated. Block-busting with windswept plazas, huge parking entrances and setbacks is not the right approach.
Think of this area as being like the Distillery District: old warehouses surrounding windswept squares, parking lots and ugly newer buildings. These old warehouses, when sandblasted, restored and renewed could indeed be fantastic forward thinking urbanism.
Insert the towers above, I do not care how high, but it is on the street where it really matters.
People forget that many of us have centuries of history in this town, that our ancestors laid out, designed and built these buildings. We are attached to our history thank you.
I actually like this proposal but I do see the only interesting part of King Street being slowly destroyed in the name of progress. The treatment at grade of the M+G proposal is very '60s-70s-style, very MINT-ish and honestly, very dated. Block-busting with windswept plazas, huge parking entrances and setbacks is not the right approach.
Think of this area as being like the Distillery District: old warehouses surrounding windswept squares, parking lots and ugly newer buildings. These old warehouses, when sandblasted, restored and renewed could indeed be fantastic forward thinking urbanism.
Insert the towers above, I do not care how high, but it is on the street where it really matters.
Last edited:
E.B.
Active Member
The TIFF and the importance of it to the city is the heritage value, not the architecture.
And I can't see Gehry using those buildings, unless he puts them below street level.
Last edited:
Canadian Chocho
Active Member
To touch on the 'novel' dimension of all of this, I find it peculiar that we always seem to be striving to get the Libeskinds, Gherys, Van der Rohes of the world rather then making them. While some may find it conservative to be cautious of this project because it limits 'great', 'world-class' architecture, one could say it is conservative to consider this project precisely that - great and world calss. The world of global architecture still very much appreciates the avant-garde. What Ghery has proposed for this block is over twenty-years old, or if you want to be more specific to building type almost ten. The ambitions that some have to be in the same league as some of the aformentioned cities in this thread are misplaced in attempting to emulate their look, whereas perhaps we ought be emulating their innovation and intent. This design, while yes it is novel and different from what we have in Toronto, on a global scale it is much more of a worn-off novelty.
Canadian Chocho
Active Member
And time again we see the mentioning of the TD Centre in this thread, which appears to is be regarded as a universally noted example of great architecture. Great new architecture, which was built at the expense of existing structures. Yet, in the world of architecture history, theory, and critique, we find the TD Centre to be largely absent. The reason lies in New York's Seagram building, which was the true manifestation of Miesian high-rise innovation. Perhaps I'm not being fair however, because there is an aspect of the TD Centre that seems to be greatly analyzed and globally lauded in such circles though is not the office towers but the 1-story banking pavillion. This sublime building is where the greatness of the TD Centre truly lies and interesngly enough it is the structure that has the least monolithinc, skyline-shaping, characteristics of the entire complex.
DtTO
Active Member
^ Don't assume a granular approach to the TD Centre; there's a reason why the banking pavilion is mentioned more often than a similar structure in Washington. Sure, individually, the TD towers might not be more important than the Seagram building, but as a whole, the TD Centre is (if not more so). I have yet to see a mention of Miesian architecture without a reference to Toronto, and yet many of his other buildings often go unmentioned. That, to me, further reaffirms the significance of M-G; scaled down, or inspected individually, the buildings might not be any greater than 8 Spruce, but as a whole, this will be Gehry's most iconic project, and if built, I don't think it would be possible for anyone to overlook it when mentioning Gehry's contributions.
adma
Superstar
E.B., you sound exactly like the sort of person I referred to in this post a few days ago...
So, if you want to know why tempers are "flairing a little", that's why.
DtTO
Active Member
^ Adma, your assumptions are ridiculous and insulting. Are you suggesting that only those in favour of the old warehouses are capable of appreciating the "non-certified" heritage stock in London/NYC? Now, that is STOOPID!