[argus]

Yea ok....Mirvish was hiring Frank Gehry to design a 60,000 sqft world class art gallery. He was going to supply this art gallery with his own personal world class Color Field art collection (I'm pretty sure this would be the world's only purpose-built permanent Color Field art gallery).

But you are willing to slag off Mirvish because you aren't sure who's going to pay for the light bulbs???!!!

And yet you have the gall to call me petty??

Please indicate where and how I "slag off" Mirvish? For example, are you suggesting that I'm referring to him as being a promiscuous woman? Or are indicating that I remarked him being similar to waste matter from ore processing?

In short, what are you talking about?

And reread your post. It's petty.

The M&G proposal has changed. Your disappointed. Get over it. It was a proposal and it still is a proposal. Nothing is set in stone as of yet.

 

[Ramako]

The original project had that potential. This scaled back project won't have the budget for full tilt out-of-the-box Gehry. It's going to have to be a more tried-and-true Gehry.

My guess is it will borrow elements from both 8 Spruce as well as IAC Center.

Even if you're right that it was solely the loss of the 700 units that caused the design to go from "full tilt out-of-the-box" Gehry to "tried-and-true" Gehry, I just find it difficult to work up as much outrage as you. Even a "tried-and-true" Gehry is a pretty rare and beautiful creature. How many Frank Gehry skyscrapers have ever actually been built? One? How many will ever be built? Probably fewer than half a dozen if you include Toronto's pair. I don't doubt that these will still be superb pieces of architecture by virtually any measure. Then again, I'm also coming from the perspective of thinking that this whole plan was a pipedream from the outset (for economic and planning reasons), so my expectations (that the city would reject the plan outright) have already been surpassed in this case.

Anyway, I thought this might be relevant to the broader discussion... Here are some of the (70!) design concepts that Gehry went through for 8 Spruce. It's interesting to note that most of the designs in this conceptual stage were far more 'out there' and ambitious than the final product, and in fact some of them are incredibly reminiscent of the initial designs for Toronto's Gehry towers.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/06/04/arts/04ouroCA02ready.html

I bring this up for two reasons: 1) I think helps to confirm that starting out with a bold and whimsical concept then refining it into something a little more practical and realistic is part of Gehry's design process; and 2) Gehry's probably far from being settled on the final design so it's a little premature to get too up in arms about the design.

 

[E.B.]

For those that did not attend the meeting, the pictures do not do justice to the models. They showed one shot of the view of a pedestrian looking up towards the waterfall on the northside of the building and it looked amazing. The podium will still have large ripples of glass that will look dramatic on a large scale and I think they are probably more realistic of the outcome than what we saw for the podium in the 3 tower design.

I was at the meeting and greenleaf is right, the models look better than the pictures. However, it's still too boxy. I sure Gehry will come up with something with a little more flair.

I know what I'm about to say is not a reason to have an issue with the project but she's such an a@s#&^*. The problem with the project is "Keesmaat". She talks about Gehry coming around to see things her way. And how she saw this and that and this and that.

She says she knew gehry could be more creative and make it "A Toronto project". He made that statement as a jab and not an acknowledgment of it being a better way. She's telling him what creativity is. what a joke.

And the Anderson Bldg will stick out like a sore thumb. It breaks the flow of the the podium.

 

[freshcutgrass]

Even if you're right that it was solely the loss of the 700 units that caused the design to go from "full tilt out-of-the-box" Gehry to "tried-and-true" Gehry, I just find it difficult to work up as much outrage as you. Even a "tried-and-true" Gehry is a pretty rare and beautiful creature.

"Outrage" is overstating, but watching the city's ineptitude can be exasperating. Also, the Mirvish Color Field gallery was the cherry on my sundae, so the total gutting of that is a huge disappointment for me....imagine how Mirvish must feel. I really hope he can still manage to somehow bring that back from its current token representation.

As for the towers...I am totally pumped about them.

While it looks like Gehry's opportunity to go wild has been tempered, "tried and true" Gehry will still translate into Toronto's most awesome skyscrapers. While we love TD Centre, the go-to for Mies is Seagram, not TD. Will Toronto's M&G towers be the go-to for Gehry towers...or will it remain 8 Spruce?

 

[freshcutgrass]

She says she knew gehry could be more creative and make it "A Toronto project". He made that statement as a jab and not an acknowledgment of it being a better way.

Keesmaat is so Fordian....too dumb to realize when you're being insulted. But what can you do...stupid can't be fixed.

And the Anderson Bldg will stick out like a sore thumb. It breaks the flow of the the podium.

Paste a completely irrelevant facade on it and you're good to go. Or as Mirvish jabbed earlier....the "Toronto Solution". ha ha ha

 

[Tewder]

What other elements??? The project has been massively scaled back....there's nothing to put there. That's why the western half of that block is just being left as is.

No, the towers were scaled back. There was nothing stopping him from knocking down the POW to allow more room for other 'element's of this project (an expanded podium for more office element, retail element or gallery space for example), but clearly Mirvish (the client in all of this) didn't want to, as he has since stated... sorry if you are having difficulty reconciling this with your 'Mirvish as great Torontonian' archetype.

Mirvish wanted to create something for Toronto on par with Sagrada Família in Barcelona. He wanted to create a great Gehry-designed permanent colour field gallery for his world class collection (his pride and joy). That was the true legacy he was hoping to accomplish with all of this. And that isn't happening now. And you're telling me he isn't disappointed about it??? Right.

So clients/developers never have to compromise grandiose dreams? Never have to deal with zoning laws, city planners, urban planners? Really? You make him sound like a petulant artiste who works in a vacuum completely ignorant of context. I suspect this is very much not the case.

Barcelona got a building that reflects Barcelona and what that city/client wanted. Toronto will get a building that reflects Toronto... and the very spectacular best that Toronto is. This is cause for celebration not envy. This new vision is enlightened city building at its very best, not some hubristic gesture, which given the downtown context in a long established area is perfectly apt (as has been debated ad nauseum already)... but take heart, this project will transform this block into an entertainment mecca with two outstanding heritage performing arts centres, an exceptional modern art gallery, a new transformative public space, retail, office and residential, and spectacular podiums and super-tall towers crowning it all. Burning from the top down, indeed!

 

[freshcutgrass]

No, the towers were scaled back. There was nothing stopping him from knocking down the POW to allow more room for other 'element's of this project (an expanded podium for more office element, retail element or gallery space for example)

Without the third tower and it's profit generating condos, the economics of demolition and loss of revenue generating existing buildings do not justify the cost of just a podium on that section of the site...hence they are simply left intact. As a means to an end, it also gets the rest of it more likely approved. It was a practical solution.

You make him sound like a petulant artiste who works in a vacuum completely ignorant of context

.

No...that would describe you (and perhaps me too). Mirvish, on the other hand, is a dignified, respectful and optimistic fellow, and continues to be so.

This new vision is enlightened city building at its very best, not some hubristic gesture

Now you sound like Keesmaat...a small-timing nobody lecturing Frank Ghery on how architecture is done properly.....

"Please Mr Gehry...a little less of your hubris and trite design, and a little more facadism will do wonders. You can thank me later" ha ha ha

Toronto will get a building that reflects Toronto...

Indeed

And that will be our punishment.

 

[Tewder]

Or as Mirvish jabbed earlier....the "Toronto Solution". ha ha ha

Na... the Toronto solution is this:

View attachment 27422

View attachment 10355

Today:

2014.05.07
View attachment 26171
42

Some missing glass on the Gooderham but Clear Spirit is occupied.
Distillery District by Marcanadian, on Flickr

15 December 2012:

View attachment 24900

We do not have to destroy pre-existing architecture, design and urban realm to build bold and new. That was old thinking. Plenty of empty lots and development areas for the wildest of schemes though (or there were at least).

 

[Tewder]

Now you sound like Keesmaat...a small-timing nobody lecturing Frank Ghery on how architecture is done properly.....

Not at all. Gehry is getting it right. I'm lecturing you... yeah, 'small time' exactly. Crying into your milk cause they didn't bust the block for big 'world classy' architecture:

And that will be our punishment.

So frustrating for you to be surrounded by people who just don't get it, right?

 

[freshcutgrass]

I'm lecturing you... yeah, 'small time' exactly. Crying into your milk cause they didn't bust the block for big 'world classy' architecture:

Why don't we give the good folks at UT a break from the schoolyard taunts.

 

[LowPolygon]

Yea ok....Mirvish was hiring Frank Gehry to design a 60,000 sqft world class art gallery. He was going to supply this art gallery with his own personal world class Color Field art collection (I'm pretty sure this would be the world's only purpose-built permanent Color Field art gallery).

But you are willing to slag off Mirvish because you aren't sure who's going to pay for the light bulbs???!!!

And yet you have the gall to call me petty??

The Mirvish collection is not a ‘color field’ collection. Broadly speaking, it is considered to be one of the best collections of privately held postwar abstraction in North America. And while it contains many color field artists, its most valuable works were always its earlier abstract expressionist works.

However, the importance of the collection and its assessed value have been greatly impacted by Mirvish’s entanglement in one of the biggest art forgery scandals of the last 50 years.

The story of Mirvish’s fake Jackson Pollocks, and his extraordinary response to the revelations, was widely reported elsewhere, and little reported here (not surpringly).

Anyway, besides the HUGE financial hit of many many millions of dollars, his bizarre response to the scandal engulfing the three Pollock paintings, has permanently damaged his reputation as a collector of note, and in my view is the biggest part of the reason he abandoned the idea of the gallery.



“Worthless! Remember, here, that Mirvish still believes the Silver Pollock to be a timeless masterpiece. But he, like the White Queen, is clearly one of those people capable of believing six impossible things before breakfast, since he also seems to think that a 50% ownership stake in a significant Pollock painting is worthless — unless, that is, an Upper East Side art gallery is attempting to sell the thing.”

“The case is fascinating because Mirvish was acting as an unabashed speculator in this case: he bought the Pollocks low, knowing that they had dubious provenance, and hoped, with Knoedler’s help, to be able to sell them high and make a tidy profit. “



Art world lawsuit of the day: Mirvish vs Knoedler

http://blogs.reuters.com/felix-salmon/2013/02/25/art-world-lawsuit-of-the-day-mirvish-vs-knoedler/

How did David Mirvish end up in the art forgery scandal of the decade?

http://www.canadianbusiness.com/com...ishs-unfortunate-international-art-adventure/

Collector David Mirvish Is Suing Knoedler Gallery, But Not for the Reasons Everyone Else Is

http://blogs.artinfo.com/artintheai...ery-but-not-for-the-reasons-everyone-else-is/

Art Gallery Sued Again Over Sale of Paintings

http://www.nytimes.com/2013/02/23/arts/design/knoedler-company-sued-over-artworks.html?_r=0

 

[adma]

And in the middle of all this UT mewling, Bozikovic talks sense.

And of course, this thread's become such skyskwapers'n'gweat-art-thwarted-by-Keesmaat tedious, it took until *now* for that piece to be posted. Such tardiness wouldn't have happened back in the more nuanced Urban Shocker days...

 

[Red October]

No...it's just that this project is clearly pointing out the shortcomings of the city. It's quite exasperating to watch. The city is rotting from the top down...if you hadn't noticed.

Jesus, talk about hyperbole.

 

[MetroMan]

This project continues to dominate discussions with friends, one of them who's an architect for IBI. He's well versed in riding the gauntlet that is city planning. Last night we discussed the proposal and he strongly believes that what we've seen is only a massing concept with a few flourishes for public consumption. The city doesn't need to know what the building will look like to approve it. While the appearance of a proposal might be considered, beauty is subjective and is at best secondary in the city's considerations. They're most concerned with density, height and shadow casting, and its effect on the surrounding neighbourhood.

Most likely, Gehry barely touched this latest proposal and it was probably instead assembled by his team over a few weeks based on ideas put out by the architect. There's a reason why he didnt unveil this tower himself. To us, it comes across as an "I give up. I'll just send my minions to deal with this" attitude. It's not. Gehry will now step in and start moulding the towers, podiums and art gallery box into his own work.

http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/06/04/arts/04ouroCA02ready.html

I bring this up for two reasons: 1) I think helps to confirm that starting out with a bold and whimsical concept then refining it into something a little more practical and realistic is part of Gehry's design process; and 2) Gehry's probably far from being settled on the final design so it's a little premature to get too up in arms about the design.

As we see in the above evolution of concepts for 8 Spruce Street, the far left model is a massing study. Imagine what New Yorkers excited for a Gehry tower would have thought if they saw the massing model: "That's not a Frank Gehry building! It's a box!!" Where have we heard that again? Yep, in this thread — including me. What we've seen so far is a brand new proposal that has barely had any input from Frank Gehry himself. It'll take months before his final vision starts to come together. My best guess is that we'll have a better idea what it'll look like by the Fall and solid renderings when it goes into sales.

 

[junctionist]

It would be good if Mirvish got approval at this point for the project--including a true 300.0 metre tower--and then had Gehry refine the towers to be more spectacular. City approval is the most important concern at this point.