Patrick Smyth
New Member
Goes on all the time at Council. Developers have been calling the shots since the Lastman Days. Good planning, concerns about public realm or infrastructure don't get the same consideration as this application is getting.
Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners
- Thread starter golodhendil
- Start date
Goes on all the time at Council. Developers have been calling the shots since the Lastman Days. Good planning, concerns about public realm or infrastructure don't get the same consideration as this application is getting.
skyrise
Active Member
Looks like M&G are going to hold out on height to a certain degree in order to fund the art gallery and college. I could see them incorporating a couple of the more significant warehouse facades as a trade off. How tall they will claim these need to be remains to be seen. The rest of the arguments put forth by the planning dept. and city are valid but they are using this project as scapegoat for poor planning. Quite laughable. With 27 towers built, under construction and approved ranging from 100 to 160 meters and 18,000 + residents set to move into the neighborhood in the next decade, M&G is but a drop bucket. These issues being discussed are 7 years too late and not sole responsibility of Mirvish to address.
Two valid arguments from an OMB stand point 1. Height- based on current precedent 2.heritage preservation. The rest of the refusal report reads more like a self damning of the poor state of planning in the city of Toronto and this neighborhood in particular.
My guess is it will come down to height as to whether or not this goes to the OMB.
Two valid arguments from an OMB stand point 1. Height- based on current precedent 2.heritage preservation. The rest of the refusal report reads more like a self damning of the poor state of planning in the city of Toronto and this neighborhood in particular.
My guess is it will come down to height as to whether or not this goes to the OMB.
Last edited:
buildup
Senior Member
Is that how you characterize David Mirvish and Frank Gehry, as dweebs?
Whenever someone takes a position in support of a tall tower, invariably there are comments about adolescent (masturbatory?) origins. Curious.
ushahid
Senior Member
guys is it rejected? I read at skyscraper page that it is rejected by council.
TheTigerMaster
Superstar
Not exactly. t's being sent to a committee to discuss possible alterations to the project. It will come back for vote in the spring.
jje1000
Senior Member
yyzer, they voted against Adam Vaughan's motion. Their no vote was not an approval of M+G. Relax, I have a feeling this one is going to turn out just fine.
Exactly! A gigantic development like this should be closely examined and refined. While people say that this is a masterpiece that shouldn't be touched, I disagree. Artists go through iterations of rough studies just like architects. They may notice something and change the piece and composition later on as well- much like how a development project may change over time to take into account aspects that were overlooked.
It's time to stop looking at these pretty pictures as the final product but rather as one of the many steps towards what will ultimately be built.
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Well said. And of course they go through big changes even after approval (look at the original ROM and AGO concepts, for starters).
The problem is that in our current system, the developers know it's better to ask for something they know is too big so they have room to bargain down. It's the same thing that happened with Midtown Minto. It was a perfectly logical place to put big towers but they asked for very big towers, threatened to go to the OMB and then reached a "compromise." The same thing will happen here and while I like Gehry's stuff, I think it's awfully naive to think he drew a perfect artistic conception on paper and the proportions happened to work out to 84 storeys. The reality, masterpiece lovers, is that they did the math of how much it would cost, how much they want to make and what council and/or the OMB were likely to approve, and then set the heights. It will come down because it was always going to come down. The heritage issues are trickier but it would have been naive of Mirvish to assume either council or the OMB would simply let them raze those buildings in deference to this new, obviously "superior" structure.
Patrick Smyth
New Member
Hard to say that without proof. What is corrupt to some might be culture to another. I cite the recent disclosures that Cllr Shiner received cheap rent from Greenwin and Mamolitti's cheap loans from developers. Note also how the Fords can call upon the highest in office to deal with Deco issues or those of any of their important label customers. Remember, a councillor, in conducting personal affairs, can use the position of their office and mislead Council, or one of its Committees, with impunity. The Integrity Commissioner can do nothing. IMO, there's a bad culture on Council and at City Hall.
Patrick Smyth
New Member
Good planning is ignored all the time by Council. It seems there is a better chance of it downtown where the greatest power is exercised. However, you only need to look at "planning" in Midtown to agree with me.
Patrick Smyth
New Member
"using this project as scapegoat for poor planning. " It's not often I see any kind of commentary on this forum that mentions good or bad planning. Too many in this city equate good planning with "beautiful" buildings.
adma
Superstar
Well, in this case, it's less about Mirvish/Gehry per se, than about Marcus Gee's Roark reference. And once one open oneself to be framed in Roarkian terms...
devjohnson
Active Member
That's not a plan. It's a suggestion by the Planning Department of what they'd like to see in a plan.
42
42
devjohnson
Active Member
gabe
Senior Member
Looks ridiculous with the old buildings. This project should be renamed The Three Dwarfs. If these buildings are going to scaled down, Ghery should back out and try to build these same buildings some where other than Toronto.
Last edited: