Canada's 50 Tallest Proposals

[caltrane74]

220 meters does nothing for Mirvish Gehry. At that height its the same level as Shangri-la and then what's the point. 260 meters is the minimum height for a wow factor project.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by caltrane74

220 meters does nothing for Mirvish Gehry. At that height its the same level as Shangri-la and then what's the point. 260 meters is the minimum height for a wow factor project.

Without the extra height...there is no point to the Mirvish-Gehry towers?

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by DrNest

I think it would be criminal if Mirvish was lowered to the 200-225m range. It's a bold, look-at-me design that is crying out to stand out. It needs its originally proposed height in order to achieve that, and maintain it for years to come.

Agree. Reducing the height by 70m accomplishes nothing except to rob the project of part of its splendor. It's beyond belief that this might not happen because 285m is considered too tall for downtown Toronto. I'm doing everything in my power to bite my tongue, but I'll just lose it if they let this opportunity for Toronto slip away.

[isaidso]

Originally Posted by RyeJay

Without the extra height...there is no point to the Mirvish-Gehry towers?

There is, but reducing the height accomplishes NOTHING! Can you imagine small town planners chopping the Chrysler Building down to 220 m because they thought it was too tall? These are only 285m tall, but they're acting like they're proposing a tower a km high.

This is our chance to build something of global architectural consequence and they're too out to lunch to recognize that.

[RyeJay]

Originally Posted by isaidso

There is, but reducing the height accomplishes NOTHING! Can you imagine small town planners chopping the Chrysler Building down to 220 m because they thought it was too tall? These are only 285m tall, but they're acting like they're proposing a tower a km high.

This is our chance to build something of global architectural consequence and they're too out to lunch to recognize that.

If there is a point the the Mirvish-Gehry towers, aside from height, then I hope supporters may be able to better articulate this: because most of the discussion I've read has been about height and nothing but...

Now let me be very clear: I support the Mirvish-Gehry proposal, including the originally proposed heights. If there are issues about heritage preservation, and foot traffic density on the relatively narrow sidewalk, and stress on water/sewerage infrastructure, and stress on public transit: then for god sake, I hope the City (and even the Province) can be proactive enough to allow this iconic proposal to go forward by taking the initiative and stepping in with resources to ensure infrastructure and services upgrades so this project will work with its surroundings while still being able to "stand out."

The public art and community elements of this project are important for the cultural growth of downtown Toronto. This region of the core if part of the entertainment allure of the city.

[Beedok]

I just hope it's less Gehry looking when it gets finished. His buildings tend to be confused messes. A few of the renders look okay, but putting three buildings that look so different and so close together, it will just end up looking like a busy mess. Like how Shanghai has stuck three landmark towers together which causes them to look like their fighting for attention rather than looking nice.

[DrNest]

Originally Posted by isaidso

Agree. Reducing the height by 70m accomplishes nothing except to rob the project of part of its splendor. It's beyond belief that this might not happen because 285m is considered too tall for downtown Toronto. I'm doing everything in my power to bite my tongue, but I'll just lose it if they let this opportunity for Toronto slip away.

Indeed, this is a very key point. Especially because in 20-30 years or so with other tall towers built in Toronto, then having these built in the 220m (ish) range will make them disappear into the sea of towers. Kinda like what (fortunately) is happening to Trump.

I take on board what RyeJay says about infrastructure, particularly sewage, water etc, but that surely would be something for the blueprints to manage.

[DrNest]

Originally Posted by Beedok

I just hope it's less Gehry looking when it gets finished. His buildings tend to be confused messes. A few of the renders look okay, but putting three buildings that look so different and so close together, it will just end up looking like a busy mess. Like how Shanghai has stuck three landmark towers together which causes them to look like their fighting for attention rather than looking nice.

I would disagree. I think the three towers in Shanghai work together because they are together screaming "look at me." What also makes them stand out, literally, is the fact that they are so much taller than the buildings around them.

In order for the Mervish towers to asthetically have a similar positive impact on the Toronto skyline, they need to have a noticable height above their surroundings.

[WhipperSnapper]

I get the height concerns over the Mirvish towers. I also understand the current designs fit their current profiles. What I don't quite get is that a redesign with towers in the 200 range is guaranteed to be less iconic.

It won't be left to the OMB. The city has proven time and time again that they are willing to work with developers. I think 240 metres is a strong possibility for at least one tower unless my math is wrong. Shadowing of a historic district is as large a concern as infrastructure requirements.

Standing out is a strawman arguement. The towers will get buried at any height as once you allow 280 metres, everyone else can build 280 metres. The potential stress on infrastructure becomes much more massive.




Of course, all this is moot as this one will likely remain a fantasy anyways.

[Innsertnamehere]

The stress on infrastructure is a bit of a straw man argument, residential buildings present little stress especially considering where this building is situated. If it places any stress it will be on areas of infrastructure(at least for transportation) that have plenty of capacity to spare. If the residents use the streetcar, it probably won't be eastbound, and if they use the subway it will be northbound in the morning rather than southbound which is where the subway runs into capacity issues.

[rbt]

Originally Posted by DrNest

In order for the Mervish towers to asthetically have a similar positive impact on the Toronto skyline, they need to have a noticable height above their surroundings.

Then they're already a failure.

If Mirvish builds 90 floor towers at a profit, you better believe the neighbours will start tossing towers with similar massing. OMB will require approvals of other similar height towers. We can't approve just this one group; OMB doesn't have a metric for `this one is pretty`.

Either way, within 20 years the Mirvish towers will not have a noticable height above their surroundings.

[WhipperSnapper]

Originally Posted by Innsertnamehere

The stress on infrastructure is a bit of a straw man argument, residential buildings present little stress especially considering where this building is situated. If it places any stress it will be on areas of infrastructure(at least for transportation) that have plenty of capacity to spare. If the residents use the streetcar, it probably won't be eastbound, and if they use the subway it will be northbound in the morning rather than southbound which is where the subway runs into capacity issues.

True if you narrow infrastructure to strictly transit requirements.

[WhipperSnapper]

Anyways, I should of known I was dealing with Pandora's box after mistakenly opened the urbantoronto thread.I just find a 10 to 15 floors reduction highly optimistic. Likewise, Mirvish getting it off the ground.

Even the sale of a Toronto landmark and a family legacy is just a drop in the bucket for the money he needs to raise.

[DrNest]

Originally Posted by rbt

If Mirvish builds 90 floor towers at a profit, you better believe the neighbours will start tossing towers with similar massing.

Not necessarily. Just because one developer has the means to build 90 floors in a tower, doesn't mean to say all will. Equally, doesn't mean to say no others will. But if the Mirvish towers were approved and built at 90 floors, I don't see an influx of other towers built at that height in that locale anytime soon.

[WhipperSnapper]

Why not? Most other developers have 100 times the means of Mirvish.

[Ramako]

Originally Posted by WhipperSnapper

Anyways, I should of known I was dealing with Pandora's box after mistakenly opened the urbantoronto thread.I just find a 10 to 15 floors reduction highly optimistic. Likewise, Mirvish getting it off the ground.

Even the sale of a Toronto landmark and a family legacy is just a drop in the bucket for the money he needs to raise.

The UT thread on M+G has been the same circular debate for 100 pages now. It's become almost unreadable.

[caltrane74]

So how about those 1 Yonge towers?

[Gresto]

^Ha, yes, enough with M-G. I think there's more hope for a conclusion satisfactory to skyscraper enthusiasts with 1-7 Yonge than with M-G, no?

[caltrane74]

Not if they also get shortened...

But chances are good they will go into sales once they are given approval in whatever form from the city.

[Innsertnamehere]

Pinnacle seems eager to go with them, so yes I wouldn't be surprised if they launch next spring, or at least te first tower or two.

I maintain that they will get a height increase on the terms that a tower or two is eliminated. It seems that the planners are fine with the FSI, they just have a problem with the 7 towers on the site. I predict that 2 towers get eliminated, the remaining get maybe 10-15 floors extra, and a small overall FSI Drop. 1 Yonge would easily become torontos new tallest IMO.