Its worth noting that this is not an intersection that has been anticipated as being a tower or tall site by City Planning. Its one thing to say that maybe 40 is ok where 20-35 has been anticipated (arguable), but that isn't the case here.
From the drawings it looks like a demo and façade for the NOW building. I don't like that they break the building height that is on the rest of the block (and to the south) on the 4th floor for the podium.
Here's the sign.
I have to say that I think this is way too tall for this location. This isn't a major intersection. 30 max, and even that feels too tall. Plus, uggo design. Clewesterfudge is right.
I kind of hate this building. Completely out of scale for its location (I think 20-30 storeys is more suitable) (Yes I'm aware of what's been approved east of it). The design is ... meh. I guess rectangle with weird balconies is what is going to pass for creativity these days.
This decision, especially the floor plate part, could have interesting implications for the proposal at the SE corner of Church and Dundas (which is proposing more than 750sqm floor plates), and the tower on Mutual south of Dundas.
I vaguely recall that the two billboard structures have heritage protection (am I mistaken?). I don't see them incorporated in the new design, or am I missing them?
Solaris: That is largely in keeping with the city's plan for the property. It was the city's intent that the corner feature a tower. That being said, it is smallest lot to feature a tower that tall in the area.