fedplanner
Active Member
I'm going to bow out, Urban Toronto. Following the Mirvish+Gehry saga has been fun. My final word of advice: stop being so conservative, especially when it comes to liquor laws. The beer store and 2am pub closing suck.
Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners
- Thread starter golodhendil
- Start date
bmiller
Active Member
I hope that only means from this conversation. Interesting times to come.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
MrR
New Member
Arent the Toronto star lands proposed for almost 100 storeys in one of the renderings? should we be concerned or will our city make them be scaled down to 45
Dan416
Senior Member
I like the alternative proposal. But I'd be fine keeping the heritage warehouses as well as building these towers at their full height. I never liked the podium that Gehry came up for these; it was a mess.
skyrise
Active Member
MrR this proposal has the tallest tower at 88 storeys. For an answer to your question, check out the 1 Yonge Street thread and click on the Waterfront Toronto link. Height and density will be definitely be an uphill battle for Pinnacle.
MrR
New Member
I thought it was 96 storeys. did they change it?
skyrise
Active Member
Yes they changed it when they submitted their official proposal to the city. There were quite few changes from the original unofficial proposal compared to the one submitted to the city.
Automation Gallery
Superstar
Sorry to be off topic, but from the looks of it the city wants them down to 50-60s
Proper post....http://urbantoronto.ca/forum/showth...le-40-70-75-2x80-88s-Hariri-Pontarini)/page76
buildup
Senior Member
One of the problems is rules of debate aren't followed. For example when density is presented as a concern solid facts that dismiss it are trotted out repeatedly - yet density keeps getting raised when in fact it should be retracted.
Likewise the "context" argument is ambiguous. Any existing building automatically wins the context argument since they are by definition part of the existing context. I could counter that with Metro Hall to the South, Festival Tower to the West, and Theatre Tower to the East - maybe the warehouses that are out of context.
I would very, very much like to see what Gehry has planned for street level. Why prevent him solving this by imposing warehouses in the design? In the renderings he's probably holding back a bit until he has some confirmation to proceed.
Likewise the "context" argument is ambiguous. Any existing building automatically wins the context argument since they are by definition part of the existing context. I could counter that with Metro Hall to the South, Festival Tower to the West, and Theatre Tower to the East - maybe the warehouses that are out of context.
I would very, very much like to see what Gehry has planned for street level. Why prevent him solving this by imposing warehouses in the design? In the renderings he's probably holding back a bit until he has some confirmation to proceed.
Ryan_T
Senior Member
Gehry's design is much more elegant, for sure. I was just noting that they seem to be much more accepting of daring designs/concepts.
Last edited:
TJ O'Pootertoot
Senior Member
Here's Christopher Hume again, tossing backhanded compliments to the "low foreheads" at city hall.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/12/19/toronto_gives_definite_maybe_to_mirvish_project_hume.html
His assertion that Keesmaat would have had no problem with these heights if the buildings were typical rectangles strikes me as absurd. He's been over the moon for this project as if they offered him a penthouse suite to the point where I don't think he acknowledges ANY of the actual concerns planning raised as legitimate.
http://www.thestar.com/news/gta/2013/12/19/toronto_gives_definite_maybe_to_mirvish_project_hume.html
His assertion that Keesmaat would have had no problem with these heights if the buildings were typical rectangles strikes me as absurd. He's been over the moon for this project as if they offered him a penthouse suite to the point where I don't think he acknowledges ANY of the actual concerns planning raised as legitimate.
buildup
Senior Member
Hume is one of many journalists with no axe to grind, who have thought deeply about the city and its potential, and who have almost universally supported this project. And why not? Just because a CONCERN gets raised repeatedly doesn't mean its a VALID concern. Not every argument needs to be BALANCED. Transit, density, height, shadow, skyline tapering, context, public amenities, local sourcing of materials (yes that was mentioned) objections have been discredited. If remaining concerns are simply that some local residents don't want it, tough luck! Every view from my condo has been lost in the last 5 years and some of these buildings have cast their shadows on my balcony. I haven't whined.
I can just see Kimmel doing a follow up bit on City Council showing the video of Ford & Nunziada dancing amit the wreckage of Toronto Council exclamining "are they ALL on crack up there?". The follow up episide on Kimmel, Colbert, Fallon et al will be an investigation into the remarkable structures Toronto Council fought a scorched earth policy to preserve. First he'll show the proposed towers [most dramatic proposal on the planet at the moment, entertaining towers equipped with art galleries and OACD in the entertainment zone] rejected by Council in favour of [queue the projector, ladies and gents, prepare yourselfs for the other-worldy warehouses....(drumroll)..."what, this must be a mistake"...please be patient while we find the correct images...
My worry is Keesmat can't afford to back down since she's so concerned about her image. I'm sure Council has their talking points prepared "it could have happened if only M/G had deferred to our expert recommendations..." The truth is that every hack wants their thumbprints all over this ('I recall the day when Dave, Frank, and I came together on that one, certainly a high point in my career...blah, blah"
I can just see Kimmel doing a follow up bit on City Council showing the video of Ford & Nunziada dancing amit the wreckage of Toronto Council exclamining "are they ALL on crack up there?". The follow up episide on Kimmel, Colbert, Fallon et al will be an investigation into the remarkable structures Toronto Council fought a scorched earth policy to preserve. First he'll show the proposed towers [most dramatic proposal on the planet at the moment, entertaining towers equipped with art galleries and OACD in the entertainment zone] rejected by Council in favour of [queue the projector, ladies and gents, prepare yourselfs for the other-worldy warehouses....(drumroll)..."what, this must be a mistake"...please be patient while we find the correct images...
My worry is Keesmat can't afford to back down since she's so concerned about her image. I'm sure Council has their talking points prepared "it could have happened if only M/G had deferred to our expert recommendations..." The truth is that every hack wants their thumbprints all over this ('I recall the day when Dave, Frank, and I came together on that one, certainly a high point in my career...blah, blah"
Last edited:
gabe
Senior Member
He's correct. If these were green glass rectangles there would be no problems here.
innsertnamehere
Superstar
^if you honestly believe that I think you need to do a little more research about why the planning department doesn't approve of these.