If I'm honest, I'm not loving it. It's busy and unresolved. Either of the two ideas would be quite svelte on its own but it just seems oddly gratuitous to combine them into one structure.
I'll have to sleep on it.
Haha, but seriously I do feel bad for this guy ^. His girlfriend just broke up with him via a text message in that pic saying she was dating someone who bought in River City Plus, a car almost hit him. All and all an awful day.
Members noted that one of the objectives of the Downtown Tall Building Study is to develop buildings in a manner which sensitively fits into their context and makes a positive contribution to the streets and public realm surrounding them. They felt that while the proposal contained some positive public realm components (heritage restoration, through block connections), that on the balance, it was not making a positive impact. The proposal was described variously as being overly bulky, massive, containing too much density and massing, being too compromised, and "over the top".
Members expressed strong support for the Downtown height vision which was recently endorsed by City Council, and suggested that this proposal should comply with it. They were cognizant that a 50* storey tower in this location would set a precedent for others to follow, and felt that the proposed height â€“ being nearly twice as high as the Downtown vision â€“ was not suitable or appropriate. One Member also noted that the proposed height was similar to the first project reviewed during this session (58 storeys at Yonge and Eglinton), and that this project was in a location where these heights were much more appropriate (the intersection of higher-order transit).
From the panel's report:
That 50 storeys is considered too tall in what is essentially the downtown core is absurd to me. The Downtown Tall Building Study is already outdated.