[Ch.G, Ch.G]

^ It appears you're having a hard time providing a consistent critique. First you say the "blocks" are "randomly sized" but then admit they're "fine" after Nowhereman notes that they respond to the context of two-story buildings to the east and a four story building to the west across the street.

Okay, so we've established that the massing makes sense.

Then you say it's actually the "internal scale" you have a problem with. But, again, Nowhereman notes that the two-story base is transparent, befitting its commercial/public nature, and the four-story residential mass is more opaque, which makes sense because it is private/residential. He also notes the two components are linked by a diagonal stairwell that scores the facade of the base.

So the "internal scale" makes sense, too.

But then you say you, no no, you don't have a problem with the base, just the way it relates to its surroundings. Hmm... this sounds curiously similar to the criticism that led to the massive design change of the new iteration. Again, let us remind you that the height of the two "blocks" are, in fact, very responsive to the neighboring structures.

As far as the "proportions of the windows" go, their vertical breadth is determined by the height of each story and their width is mostly determined by production/stability/whatever accounts for window spans in any other glass-sheathed high-rise. I mean, duh. The slight variations and random placement of the different colors are clearly an attempt to create visual interest, a familiar conceit of contemporary design.