TheStar.com | Ideas | The vertical revolution takes root

Suddenly it seems Toronto has become Skyscraper City, Vertical Village, the high-rise capital of Canada.

Just yesterday, word came that Aura, a 75-storey, mixed-use condo tower, will be built at the corner of Yonge and Gerrard Sts.

Last week, it was One Bloor, an 80-storey tower at Bloor and Yonge.

The week before that, it was Donald Trump's 59-storey hotel-condo at Adelaide and Bay.

More than ever, it seems, the sky's the limit. But in fact, there's really nothing new about this reach for the stars. Since the days of our tiny-perfect former mayor David Crombie's 45-foot height bylaw, the city has come a long, long way.

Highlighted by lampertina

But if you're talking about Bloor and Yonge, does it really make a difference if it's 70, 80 or 90 storeys tall? What matters is the pedestrian experience and the building's relationship with the street.

Highlighted by lampertina

When Minto first proposed two towers – 52 and 48 storeys – for Yonge and Eglinton several years ago, the screams of outrage could be heard across North Toronto. Posters appeared in windows and former councillor Anne Johnston lost her seat to that nattering nabob of NIMBYism, Karen Stintz.

The same Stintz who has spent the last few years leading the fight against a six-storey condo on Avenue Rd. north of Lawrence. That's right, six storeys.

The reactionaries notwithstanding, Toronto is well on its way to becoming a high-rise haven. That much was spelled out in the city's new Official Plan, which identified the main arteries – the "avenues" – as the most appropriate location for growth. The idea was that by restricting development to built-up streets, established neighbourhoods could be preserved intact.

This all makes eminent sense; despite the strong anti-height feelings, the issue shouldn't be how to stop growth but how to control it.

Highlighted by lampertina

In this respect, the genesis of Aura offers hope. It was vetted by a city-appointed design review panel that went through the proposal in detail and suggested major improvements. Everyone involved in the process – architects, developer and city planners – agrees the scheme is better now than it was when first presented.

Add to this the fact that the building will be constructed on the site of what's now a parking lot, that it will be connected to the subway and it's hard to argue against it.

Indeed, the real issue is not height, but design, which is to say, how a building relates to its surroundings, what it gives back to the city, and how it meets the street. The Minto towers at Yonge and Eglinton are a good example – despite their height they have a much happier relation with ground level than do the mid-rise slabs across the road on the west side of Yonge. These 1970s structures loom ominously over the sidewalk blocking sunlight and sucking life from their surroundings. By contrast, the Minto towers rise from a five-storey podium and are set back from the sidewalk. Interestingly, one of the design review panel's main objections to the Aura scheme was the podium, which, it insisted, was not connected strongly enough to the street.

Though the tower was cleaned up here and there, this was the panel's big move.

"As far as I'm concerned, the issue for years has been design not height," says downtown Councillor Kyle Rae. "There are still those who aren't happy about what's happening in Toronto, but it's good for the city. People want to live in here again."

Highlighted by lampertina