Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain
I feel like it'd be better if the upper part of the building came down all the way, instead of this big glass cube on the lower half which looks as if it's crushing the older buildings on the block.
|
The glass cube, which provides most of the contrast, is not something I would imagine as "crushing" the podium/heritage façades just because the new tower's girth is nearly parallel. The arrangement looks heavyset, but I don't see that as unattractive.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Drybrain
The architectural integrity of the heritage structures (designated years ago in order to be preserved in their entirety) gets totally subsumed under the new structure. A setback would go a long way to addressing this problem--and hey, if the building needs to go taller to make up for lost square footage, I've got no problem with that.
|
We realise this is impossible though, right? Since going taller isn't an option, a setback would be outright sacrificing square footage. I'm not convinced it's reasonable to request this from the developer.