Big Daddy
Senior Member
So, with any luck, this wii be resolved on the 18th.
Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners
- Thread starter golodhendil
- Start date
freshcutgrass
Senior Member
Barring a few dumb questions from the public, an excellent conversation between Hume & Mirvish....thanks for posting. (the audio/video was appalling....whoever is responsible should be suffocated).
fedplanner
Active Member
fedplanner
Active Member
Nope, the meeting has been postponed due to scheduling conflict of the panel.
Ramako
Moderator
Great video! Mirvish comes off as earnest and thoughtful.
Be forewarned that it's difficult to watch it and not get excited about this project actually happening. As someone who expects this project to ultimately get canned, I'm trying to keep my expectations in check.
ushahid
Senior Member
Mirvish rocked the floor. he looks like a complete gentleman. I think he should be given a green light because he is sincere and he will bring a change and these buildings will be iconic. if he was like other developers he would not have faced so many problems. he would have quitted a long time ago but he is still fighting to get these approved. he is ready to make a sacrifice by demolition of the theatre that was really close to him. I support him and his project.
what do you guys think?
what do you guys think?
buildup
Senior Member
Excellent video, informative, exciting, entertaining! M&H form and effective good cop/bad cop routine. I agree DM is a true gentleman I learned a great deal just watching his deportment and incredible patience. Also a profound and articulate thinker. Do not underestimate how important Hume was to the proceedings - he was able to say things DM couldn't because it would've sounded self-promotional! I loved how Hume sat back trying to let the 'tall buildings lead to mental illness' comment pass. But then he couldn't take it any longer and 10 minutes later he explodes.
Finally, its only natural that questions tend to come from objectors since people who are on-side have nothing to object to. My sense, also, was the audience loved the presentation. No groans, hisses, lots and lots of applause by Canadian standards.
Finally, its only natural that questions tend to come from objectors since people who are on-side have nothing to object to. My sense, also, was the audience loved the presentation. No groans, hisses, lots and lots of applause by Canadian standards.
adma
Superstar
And as somebody who's blown the heritage + "it isn't the end of the world if this doesn't see fruition" horn, I'm actually less pessimistic than you are. (Which must say *something*. Especially as it's more from the "observational" than "actively fighting" standpoint)
Ramako
Moderator
The sheer audacity and ambition of this project alone is enough to make me feel pessimistic. It's the rigid opposition to it from planning staff, heritage buffs, anti-height crusaders, tall-poppy cutters, etc. on top of that which makes me feel downright fatalistic.
To be brutally honest, I think that the debate itself will be the only real fruit that this endeavour will actually bear. I'm also resigned to the fact that these warehouses will inevitably come down for something, albeit of far inferior scale and quality. Basically, if we end up with something better than heritage façades poorly pasted onto some 157 metre, mediocre Page+Steele towers (a la King Blue), I'll be pleased. That's the worst case scenario in my mind, and it's a bullet with our name on it I see coming a mile away.
junctionist
Senior Member
I enjoyed that talk because you see men with passion for city building, ambition and sophistication. We need it all. But it's a good thing we have our city government because without some strong entity, their attempts to simply ignore the heritage issues would probably work barring some activist campaign to the OMB. They avoided criticisms from the audience, generally with roundabout answers that didn't get to the heart of the criticism in the question:
-Is 80 storeys too tall here?
-Well, there are always people who say things are too tall. Some say a 6 storey condo in the Beach is too tall.
A recent OMB case that was posted here is also good in that the board decided something to the effect that novel architecture is not a reason to demolish a legally designated heritage building. The OMB is supposed to follow precedent.
-Is 80 storeys too tall here?
-Well, there are always people who say things are too tall. Some say a 6 storey condo in the Beach is too tall.
A recent OMB case that was posted here is also good in that the board decided something to the effect that novel architecture is not a reason to demolish a legally designated heritage building. The OMB is supposed to follow precedent.
buildup
Senior Member
Adma, I never completely grasp what you're saying, but I respect that! If I can't understand its because you must be smarter than me. So I am immensely relieved to hear you are (I think) doing a mia culpa and coming in board with M + G. Welcome, all is forgiven. Perhaps we should have a meet & greet in the proposed Jack Bush gallery providing we are still all alive. For the record it is still unclear whether you are a precotious 10-year old or tech-savvy 85 year-old. Can you enlighten us? Are you male, female, or some blend? Can you bring UrbanShocker back into the fold?
Last edited:
adma
Superstar
I'm not exactly "coming on board". It's merely an roundabout way to the same conclusion as always: that the panic over our being potentially "cheated out of a masterpiece" is blown out of proportion.
And while it's nothing to do with whether I'd, personally, endorse the decision to demolish; those who're advancing the scheme would do best by sticking to the "this case is exceptional" fundamentals, and steering clear of overwrought "this never should have been designated in the first place" judgment.
And finally: if you're going to conclude that the warehouses are doomed even w/o Mirvish/Gehry--look: the same factors the *might* scuttle Mirvish/Gehry are just as likely to scuttle lesser successor schemes. Though I can see how such conclusions can be come by when, once again, a lot of this thread's participants have been conditioned through a "new stuff" rather than "existing conditions" bias--it's the Projects & Construction forum, after all...
ehlow
Senior Member
Thank you for posting this. Very compelling talk. The Q & A section had excellent answers, it made me wish Hume was at all public meetings for developments to give perspective. I enjoyed the shout-out to Minto Midtown and Yonge & Eg too!
Ramako
Moderator
I assume you're addressing this comment to me since I was the last to pose that hypothetical outcome, so I'll respond.
I would absolutely disagree that new conditions are ipso facto superior to existing conditions. Not all "heritage" is of equal value and not all proposals are of equal merit. Of course every proposal should be considered on a case-by-case basis.
What I have been conditioned by are the nearly countless examples in this city of designated heritage buildings coming down for mediocre projects merely because their façades were saved. I don't see why a lesser successor scheme that proposes to save the façades here would get any more opposition than the many proposals that will soon demolish Restaurant Row, which is not much. In fact, we've already seen planning staff propose to allow a (smaller) version of the Gehry scheme if the façades are saved. Unless the our entire planning regime suddenly changes, those warehouses are coming down and you can take that to the bank. The only question is whether or not the façades are saved.
Last edited:
Ramako
Moderator
I guess another possible outcome which I haven't really considered yet is that this project goes ahead at the reduced scale proposed by planning staff but without the galleries, OCAD space and other public amenities that the additional height was intended to pay for. That would be a shame as those features are what would make it a neighbourhood destination and a truly exceptional proposal. Of course, the heritage issues could deep six even that scenario, particularly given that such a proposal would be that much less meritorious.