Quote:
Originally Posted by Troyeth
CGII, those interiors look fine. Will we ever be able to appreciate them regularly? Highly doubtful, unless we fall on hard times (and are lucky enough to be provided shelter there). No, what were are offered for visual [dis]pleasure is only this.
This building will no-question be host to services that are praiseworthy and hugely beneficial to society, a welcome addition of new opportunities to people and families that need them most. Beyond that, it is also comparatively environmentally benevolent, efficient and completed on what was likely a very, very limited budget. All of these are laudable things.
Divorcing use from design, though, we must admit this building does not make is feel good, nor alive, nor inspired. Excuse why it looks horrific to your very final breath--please do!--but in the end it will always just look like shit. There is no defending that. |
Actually you are defending that, this building isn't about being noticed or screaming "look at me!!" if it was, they would of painted it red or some collection of loud colors. Instead it has a look that allows it to blend in with its surroundings, which building to your surrounding is often times an important technique to preform in architecture, and a common thing done in Europe if I am not mistaken.
As the renderings point out, this building was designed to have the users in mind, sure most of us will never get to see inside this building, and I am happy knowing that because I wouldn't want to be in those people's positions, but should the architect sacrifice the inside to make this building look like a condo building crammed in a weird location giving the residents views of the back ends of buildings...oh how inspiring that would be for the residents of this building.
No one has said this building is beautiful, but that was never the question, the question was can this building be defended? Which the answer to that is within the building's context, yes it can be defended.
Do you like this building? Obviously not, and you feel that it should of been done differently, though I would question your demand to have the building done differently would of been anywhere near as successful given the location of this building and the challenges it faced.
With that said, low income housing and homeless shelters in this country always face an uphill battle when trying to get them constructed because it is near impossible to get money to construct things like this, which are often times funded by churches that are more concerned with the users rather than the exterior architecture. In some degree, this is a valid excuse, should the church not build this building because they cannot afford to make the exterior look like some generic apartment building or should the church look at ways of making the living experience for those that use this building the best they can make it? When trying to decide where the money goes, this is a very tricky debate.
Given this building's location, I would say it is neither ugly or beautiful, it is purely a functional building that is tucked away from daily sight. One could easily argue that this building best reflects its users and acts as a castle to protect those from the harsh streets they have been so use to.
Would you still be having this argument about this building if the tiny windows were larger and consumed most of the facade? Would you of wanted some detailed and expensive brick working done to the facade to make the building more interesting? Or would it of just required a better choice in paint? I am unsure of where you are drawing the line for this building, what would of been a better choice for this location and budget that would of provided the same level of comfort for those that use this building? It is much easier to stand outside of architecture and criticize it, but when it comes to designing respectable architecture that both benefits the user and the building's surroundings, it becomes much harder and complicated to do.
Though on a side note, the low income housing photos from Vancouver were fantastic, that is a great example of a city that has shown civic class on how it deals with its low income housing and homeless shelters and it would be amazing if more cities held themselves to that same level.