Toronto Forma | 308m | 84s | Great Gulf | Gehry Partners

that the panic over our being potentially "cheated out of a masterpiece" is blown out of proportion.
Click to expand...

Actually, the whole idea that "heritage" is a spatial concept has yet to even be grasped in this conversation.

And there's more at stake than just eye candy architecture.
 
Ramako said:
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.
Click to expand...

I know I am saying this second time. If someone gives me the personal email address of Mirvish I will give him an advice of cancelling the 82-storey tower for now and he can add 10 floors to each of the remaining towers. there are more chances that city council will give him a green light because less density, one heritage building preserved and can be used as parking spots and city will get new tallest buildings. it will be a wise decision to cancel one tower because these condos will be expensive for sure and few people are going to buy these.
any comments?
and adma please tell us your age and gender. the suspense of your age is like the suspense of some crime investigation movie.
 
Last edited:
ttk77 said:
That was a fascinating video. Thanks for posting it.
Click to expand...

+1, I enjoyed it as well!.
As for this project, I love the ambition, but I still think the design needs work as to regards with the height of the towers and how their podiums work with street level. I think there's an opportunity to use the height of the 3 towers in conjunction with each other to unique effect by tapering the heights; considering the current proposal lists them almost identical in height. Perhaps either having the tallest tower built on the eastern side, or in the middle, with the shortest tower facing john st having a height reduction to, say; 220m
 
Agreed, steveeve. One of the design aspects I find most glaringly awkward is the near-uniform height of the three towers. I think it would be better to have one high tower flanked by two that are 20-25% lower in height. Otherwise three of them so closely together seems heavy-handed - monstrously out of scale with what's happening around the proposed site.
 
steveve said:
+1, I enjoyed it as well!.
As for this project, I love the ambition, but I still think the design needs work as to regards with the height of the towers and how their podiums work with street level.
Click to expand...

Mirvish said in the video that there will be 70 designs and they are on 40th designs and one will be picked from all the 70 designs.
 
Didn't watch the video - obviously I should. 70 designs! Interesting. So we're a little past the half-way point in the process. The end result could be significantly different, then. Cool.
 
steveve said:
+1, I enjoyed it as well!.
As for this project, I love the ambition, but I still think the design needs work as to regards with the height of the towers and how their podiums work with street level. I think there's an opportunity to use the height of the 3 towers in conjunction with each other to unique effect by tapering the heights; considering the current proposal lists them almost identical in height. Perhaps either having the tallest tower built on the eastern side, or in the middle, with the shortest tower facing john st having a height reduction to, say; 220m
Click to expand...

I think part of the reason the three contrasting towers work together is that they are the same height and the way they play off each other. The curves of one seem to match up with planes/angles of the others and I'm not sure you could get that same effect with different heights.
 
Well, I hope that the three aren't more or less the same height but at this point I'm intensely curious as to what the final design will look like.
 
ttk77 said:
I think part of the reason the three contrasting towers work together is that they are the same height and the way they play off each other. The curves of one seem to match up with planes/angles of the others and I'm not sure you could get that same effect with different heights.
Click to expand...

I think any one of these towers at any height is far better looking than 99% of the high-rise condos being built in our city.

I agree though, the three of them together at that height would create an impressive & iconic image. I would still want to see these built if they reduced the height though.
 
junctionist said:
I think towers of varying heights would be the most interesting look. You could still align the features of the different towers' facades for contrast.
Click to expand...

I'm just finding it hard to see how that would be done without diminishing the importance of one or two of the towers to the final product. Certainly in the case of twins or triplets reducing the height of one of the towers adds more interest, but I'm personally not convinced that would be the case here. Maybe if the towers were in a non-linear arrangement.
 
Non-linear would be a possibility. I'd use height for additional emphasis on the boldest tower in the centre. The differences would be subtle, though, as the architecture is so bold that it doesn't need much in the way of additional visual interest. It would look more organic this way, like how a cluster of mountains peaks tend to have slightly different heights.
 
The middle tower is subtly taller than the other two as already planned… The order of height from west to east is 82, 86, 84 storeys. That sounds like what you're suggesting already. Maybe you're talking about 80, 88, 84, or 81, 87, 84… but any aesthetic judgement on the benefits of staggering the heights more than they are now will be subjective to the person considering it. Any reason to object in terms of approvals would have to come based on the length of shadows or other quantifiable facets of the proposal.

42
 
I'd like the differences to be just a little more noticeable, but not dramatically different. No matter what height is approved, the proportional difference in height should be maintained.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top