SLC: Performing Arts Center and 111 Tower - Page 14

delts145 · #**261** Posted **Jun 9, 2014, 11:56 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

Renderings almost always look better than a final building. So, I doubt they are underwhelming compared to the final product.

In this particular situation I seriously doubt that you're right.

Stenar · #**262** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 12:15 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ToysNoiz

222 looked faaarr better in real life compared to the renderings.

Did I say buildings always look worse than the renderings?

It's not difficult to make a building look better than this:

ajiuO · #**263** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 3:14 AM**

The Borg cube is a good example of something turning out worse then the renderings..

Orlando · #**264** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 4:01 AM**

I think the Borg Cube turned out relatively well compared to the renderings.

ajiuO · #**265** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 2:31 PM**

I'm not afraid to admit it.. I like the Borg cube slightly more then the Shilo Inn.

delts145 · #**266** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 3:59 PM**

Have they finished up yet with the landscaping on the Courthouse? Particularly interested in seeing the slope over on south side. I like the Courthouse for the same reason many others have stated, it's unique. Yes it's stark and a little foreboding, but it's not brutal and again it is very unique for Downtown. Also, it doesn't scream cheap to me. I think the surrounding plaza and landscaping will add a very positive touch also.

delts145 · #**267** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 4:33 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by ajiuO

The Borg cube is a good example of something turning out worse then the renderings..

Even though I do like the Courthouse, I have to give you a bit of a nod on those renderings AjiuO. LOL, though I can see where the views on this can get very subjective. One gripe I would have with the renderings that I would have put the developers to task on, would be the exterior metal ribbing. In many of the renderings the exterior's ribbing was given a highly polished, reflective chrome like finish. That same finish in reality I think would have been an added plus, vs. the matte finish the Courthouse ended up with.

On further thought, perhaps that would have wreaked havoc with the Sun's reflection and the interior's natural and manmade lighting. Hmm, maybe just a chrome finish on the outward facing side of the metal slats.

jubguy3 · #**268** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 6:03 PM**

Keep in mind that for 222 we got skidmore owings & Merrill which is one of the best firms in the US (they designed one World Trade Center, for example) and I think if we can get more architects like them we can have a beautiful, modern skyline that blends well with post modern and sullivanesque buildings but also stand out as unique and beautiful.

Stenar · #**269** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 9:48 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jubguy3

Keep in mind that for 222 we got skidmore owings & Merrill which is one of the best firms in the US (they designed one World Trade Center, for example) and I think if we can get more architects like them we can have a beautiful, modern skyline that blends well with post modern and sullivanesque buildings but also stand out as unique and beautiful.

SOM designed the 111 tower, which is a steaming pile of boring/ugly.

Sullivanesque architecture is generally stone with intricate carvings, not sterile glass curtains.

jubguy3 · #**270** Posted **Jun 10, 2014, 11:30 PM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

SOM designed the 111 tower, which is a steaming pile of boring/ugly.

Sullivanesque architecture is generally stone with intricate carvings, not sterile glass curtains.

Hey stenar, I'm not an idiot. I know what sullivanesque architecture is. I said it would blend well with our skyline much like what NYC's skyline has done.
111 will hopefully be a nice building. If it's as shiny as 222 I think people will like it.

Stenar · #**271** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 12:41 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by jubguy3

Hey stenar, I'm not an idiot. I know what sullivanesque architecture is. I said it would blend well with our skyline much like what NYC's skyline has done.
111 will hopefully be a nice building. If it's as shiny as 222 I think people will like it.

The reason why people like 222 is because it isn't a box. 111 is a box.

Orlando · #**272** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 12:43 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

SOM designed the 111 tower, which is a steaming pile of boring/ugly.

Sullivanesque architecture is generally stone with intricate carvings, not sterile glass curtains.

Stenar, I think SOM is out of the picture now. Though, I'm not certain. I think they backed out when Hamilton backed out. I think the local architect, MHTN, is doing the job now. Thus, the renderings and design are lacking.

Stenar · #**273** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 12:45 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

Stenar, I think SOM is out of the picture now. Though, I'm not certain. I think they backed out when Hamilton backed out. I think the local architect, MHTN, is doing the job now. Thus, the renderings and design are lacking.

The building looked terrible before SOM backed out, if they did.

Orlando · #**274** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 12:50 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Stenar

The building looked terrible before SOM backed out, if they did.

Even with the accordion affect? I definitely think they weren't on their A-game with how it crashed into UPAC. 222 responded to the buildings around it. 111 could at least show a vertical reveal at the joint that UPAC crashes into it. Then, maybe they could change the curtain wall or metal panel on the left- over portion to the south of that joint.

Stenar · #**275** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 12:58 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

Even with the accordion affect? I definitely think they weren't on their A-game with how it crashed into UPAC. 222 responded to the buildings around it. 111 could at least show a vertical reveal at the joint that UPAC crashes into it. Then, maybe they could change the curtain wall or metal panel on the left- over portion to the south of that joint.

They didn't even do any work, they just copied a building they designed for San Francisco.

http://forum.skyscraperpage.com/showthread.php?p=6221753#post6221753

Orlando · #**276** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 1:10 AM**

Ya, I saw that one. Though, maybe their commitment to the project was tentative given the lack of commitment by Hamilton. Here's what I would suggest would help the design somewhat.

Stenar · #**277** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 4:00 AM**

Quote:

Originally Posted by Orlando

Ya, I saw that one. Though, maybe their commitment to the project was tentative given the lack of commitment by Hamilton. Here's what I would suggest would help the design somewhat.

That is a lot better.

DCRes · #**278** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 3:16 PM**

20140611 - Metro Bldg by , on Flickr
One of the giant beam is gone. When I walked by yesterday there were sparks flying as they were cutting through the second beam. I would expect it to be gone soon as well

s.p.hansen · #**279** Posted **Jun 11, 2014, 6:01 PM**

DCRes · #**280** Posted **Jun 12, 2014, 3:29 PM**

Looks like my prediction that the second beam would be gone soon was correct