syn
Senior Member
I just noticed this project as I walked by the notice on Yonge last night. I have to say I'm thrilled the DRP rejected the current design. The tower wasn't terribly remarkable, but the base looks horrific.
I did, however, get a laugh at Canderel and G&C's expense. As professionals, it's sad they need to be told:
"Go back to basics and follow required density/height/setbacks and design within those
limitations."
That should be the FIRST thing they would do when creating a parti for this site. (Unfortunately, developers are not interested in context or creating buildings that fit the constraints of a site; rather they choose arbitrary heights according to the profit margin they seek in the project.)
Do any developers anywhere in the city ever have to "follow required density/height/setbacks and design within those limitations"? Then why should Canderal have to? It's not sad that they need to be told that because they, and other developers, invariably get away with it. What's sad is our impotent planning regime, and its absurdly low as-of-right height and density restrictions.
But does a building need to be "graceful"? I can think of some really great designs that are clunky and all the more interesting for it.