Quote:
Originally Posted by urbancanadian
GOOD:
Sam: "Hmm... interesting how the building has an odd angle on the top portion. I don't think it works with the overall design."
Kim: "There's a viewcone that bisects the site there."
Sam: "Oh ok makes sense. Think they could've been way more creative in addressing the viewcone. Doesn't look good."
|
Obviously my question was not addressed to you. You are not a moderator.
But your personal vision of what constitutes acceptable speech about how a viewcone affects the design or massing of a building under discussion is comical: it must end with the conclusion that any drawbacks in a building's design or massing are the result of the developer's lack of creativity, not the artificial encumbrances that limit the building's creative possibilities.
It would forbid full and candid critical assessments of projects, such as SFUVancouver's analysis of the Canada Post Building proposal, which correctly diagnoses the prime cause of the unpleasing (but unavoidable) massing of towers:
Quote:
Originally Posted by SFUVancouver
Initial thoughts:
Very happy to see that they are committed to keeping the exterior of the existing structure.
Glad to see a mixed program of office, retail, and residential (market & rental, too).
Happy to see that there has been an effort made to create some texture and depth to the tower facade.
The inclusion of office, especially giant block-long 'land-scraper' floor plates is excellent and appeals to businesses that are often looking for breadth instead of height for their GLA. It's more space efficient, avoids the need for expensive internal circulation, is generally considered to be more conducive to cooperation, and it reduces the literal hierarchy of the organization.
Understand entirely that this is a preliminary massing model, however there is a lot of 'sameness' at the moment and I hope that further refinement can yield some interesting gestures.
"Cracking" the exterior of the Post Office structure in a few places could present some interesting opportunities to have the new modern towers appear to come down to grade/burst out through the old facade like new bark on a tree in spring.
The tyranny of the view cones strike again and has negatively affected the massing of a major downtown site. I would love to see the view that the view cone protects and decide for myself how irreplaceable the peek-a-boo view is.
The separation between towers sure looks tight, thought the massive size of the full city block site probably is messing with my sense of scale. I'm sure that they aren't any closer than the normal 75' minimum.
|
Threaded Mode