AND this is exactly why I wasn't a supporter of this... a lot of people called people who weren't supporters people without vision and NIMBYs... but it was hard not to be skeptical that this wasn't all about money. If it was an empty parking lot I would have never had any complaints. But this part of King street works so if its going to be destroyed it better be for a good reason.
 
yyzer:

Because we have never really considered artistry as a legitimate part of the planning process - the rules certainly didn't codify it much, much less assign a worth to it. That's part of the problem - the difficulty in assigning a value, and to balance it against the drawbacks. Planning is supposed to help take unpredictability out of development - and here you have something that can introduce unpredictability, for better or worse.

sixrings:

I am not going to engage in the labelling of the opponents, but to be frank it has always been about money - the original buildings were also about that - they weren't built as pieces of art. To somehow embue it with special qualities it wasn't intended for and use that deny the even more exemplar is a bit "misguided". A lot of things "work" - not everything is exceptional.

AoD
 
Last edited:
yyzer said:
Why on earth would these nobodies think that they can mess with the vision of a recognized great artist? Do they really think that they 'know better'?
Click to expand...

It's not a planner's job to be an art critic. A planner cant approve/reject a project based on the design. The only parameters a planner can look at are the official plan, and zoning by-laws. None of these regulate the overall appearance of a project.

That being said, just because the planning department recommends something different, doesn't mean council has to side with them. The planners are there to give a professional opinion based on legal precedent. Council can do whatever it wants in the end.
 
devjohnson said:
Not a massive fan of the podium.

935248_10151402940026923_491278679_n.jpg
Click to expand...

The Eastern most tower above is likely the best candidate where one or more facades could be integrated to the base, with the light glass cladding sprouting from it and enveloping them.

I also think that if red or yellow brick were used to clad the exterior beams instead of wood, that might better accomplish the nod to this area's industrial heritage.

The new tower forms and cladding, imo, are miles above the previous renders. I suspect we're very close to a finalized design.

Equally, I suspect that the heights of the towers will ultimately be determined by market forces. As such, I feel 80+ storeys might be a bit overly optimistic, but would have no problem with permission for 70+ storey structures there.
 
I'm just hoping that all of the "powers", be they the planners, Council, and developers / architects, seize the day. This project (height aside) has the power to make King/Simcoe into one enormous destination. Think about what's already there, RT Hall, a small theatre district, Pecaut Square. Not all of it is good architecture (expecially Metro Hall), but a remake of Pecaut Squre and the addition of the Gehry stuff on north side of King St. and MTCC can ultimately give Toronto one really big gathering point and a vista to go along with it. Vistas are not the big thing in Toronto, it's time to have one. So let's hope that the response from Toronto City Hall is slanted toward city-building rather than inside-the-box thinking.

Edit: I haven't revealed my mindset about the old brick building before this post. My opinion is that it's time to let it go. No qualms about he POW theatre, either. Move forward, move forward.
 
Last edited:
Northern Magus said:
The Eastern most tower above is likely the best candidate where one or more facades could be integrated to the base, with the light glass cladding sprouting from it and enveloping them.

I also think that if red or yellow brick were used to clad the exterior beams instead of wood, that might better accomplish the nod to this area's industrial heritage.

The new tower forms and cladding, imo, are miles above the previous renders. I suspect we're very close to a finalized design.

Equally, I suspect that the heights of the towers will ultimately be determined by market forces. As such, I feel 80+ storeys might be a bit overly optimistic, but would have no problem with permission for 70+ storey structures there.
Click to expand...

I wouldn't mind at least one of the towers reaching the 80+ storey mark, with the other two being slightly shorter. I think the project would look much better as a whole if the middle tower was the tallest of the 3, and the other two stepped down, providing a better transition to the area around this project.

I too love the forms and cladding. Looks like ice melting away from the buildings. Very appropriate for a Canadian city :)
 
I think Gehry should come and speak in person at Council - he is a Canadian artist, and this could be one of his final works given his age. He has a very good case to make before our elected officials as to why an exception should be granted so that he is given the chance to bring something that would make the city proud - and cement the connection with his city. This is our Sagrada Familia moment. Would Barcelona have turned Gaudi down because the project doesn't conform to the plans?

AoD
 
Last edited:
Tuscani01 said:
I wouldn't mind at least one of the towers reaching the 80+ storey mark, with the other two being slightly shorter. I think the project would look much better as a whole if the middle tower was the tallest of the 3, and the other two stepped down, providing a better transition to the area around this project.

I too love the forms and cladding. Looks like ice melting away from the buildings. Very appropriate for a Canadian city :)
Click to expand...

AlvinofDiaspar said:
I think Gehry should come and speak in person at Council - he is a Canadian artist, and this could be one of his final works given his age. He has a very good case to make before our elected officials as to why an exception should be granted so that he is given the chance to bring something that would make the city proud - and cement the connection with his city. This is our Sagrada Familia moment. Would Barcelona have turned Gaudi down because the project doesn't conform to the plans?

AoD
Click to expand...

Well stated, both of you. I think at least one the three towers should go upwards of 80+ storeys.
 
This recent render looks much better than the initial drawings/renderings. But there is still a middle ground to be found with the heritage buildings, I am positive. In the pic posted by ProjectEnd, the cloud abruptly stops for the old facade; why cant the cloud carry over the facade in the form of a fritted glass canopy, as if the building were in a fog?
 
This project could respect the historic podiums and be limited to 50-60 stories and it would still be a fantastic addition to the city.

In order for me to support 3 80+ story towers here I would like to see central King (University - Spadina) limited to pedestrians, bicycles, and streetcars. You can barely walk on the sidewalks there as is - I think that would be a win-win for all.
 
The new iteration is pretty remarkable as far as the towers go.

The Planning Department's vision for the base is horrible. I know this isn't realistic, but if there's one project I hope could go ahead with little-no design compromise it's this one.

Gehry could probably integrate the heritage structures in a pretty spectactular way if it became a requirement.
 
The idea of wood beams at ground level is something I just saw mentioned about this proposal now... and I really like that idea. I also like that Gehry is seeking to create something "light" here as opposed to something heavy and overbearing. I'm curious to see how the public realm/ streetscape shapes up in this proposal.
 
Yes please.

Can we break some rules this time and have this? If this squeaks through the myriad barriers and naysayers, it will do more than become an architectural curiosity and "destination".

It will help change the future of Toronto's future new built form. Corny, romantic to suggest this? Of course. But it will echo for years... this not a "one off", it's the teenager leaving home, paying rent and making his/her way into the world. ;-)
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top