In fairness, architects, as a profession, have a pretty bad record for urban planning. That is her job, and not Gehry's specialty.
You are welcome to disagree with Keesmaat's stance, but please don't pull out the "Gehry-is-a-God-who-shalt-not-be-questioned" schtick.
To your first point, I agree 100% and I didn't say that in my original post.
To your second point, I should have made it clear that the "she" I was referring to was the writer of the article, Kristen Gagnon. Kristen is a student pursuing a PhD in Architecture.
btw, I don't believe for a minute that "Gehry-is-a-God-who-shalt-not-be-questioned". I reserve that title for myself. And if you listen closely, you can hear the angels in heaven singing.
Now back to my response, what I do find irksome with Ms. Gagnon are comments like this:
"then why do we not change the architecture to make it financially sustainable at a (even slightly) smaller scale? And while we’re at it, why not find a way to save or at least integrate both the historical and culturally significant portions of the existing site? Gehry is a great architect – there should therefore be a way for him to make an affordable, proportional and historically/culturally sensitive development."
Also "Perhaps the public’s upset over the potential loss of a part of the city shows a need for Gehry to use his architectural imagination to find a way to save some of it"
The reason I find this irksome is because M-G have already stated that they would make adjustments to accommodate certain things. What Gerhry has said is he won't incorporate the existing buildings into the design, if that's required he won't proceed with the project. And that isn't unreasonable. If he had to incorporate numerous existing buildings into all his projects that were totally out of context with the entire vision of the project. That would seem unreasonable.
Whether we like it or not Gehry is recognised as a significant architect. He doesn't need this project to enhance his reputation. If he or anyone else with a reputation to lose, takes on too many local requirements for their vision, then they likely wouldn't do it either.
Imagine Steven Spielberg making a movie in Toronto and the Mayor says he needs to add 2 or 3 shots of the CN Tower or he can't make the film here. But spielberg says my movie is a western. What do you think Spielberg would say and do? I'm just sayin.