Quote:
Originally Posted by dleung
both the tower proposals on the last page were hideous. The Toronto formula of dumb boxes jazzed up by "balcony play" has migrated here. There's always an ideal spot for the balcony relative to the unit layout within, so half the units are screwed.
The Charleston only looks ok because of its shape + curtainwall, rather than any of the other finishes.
|
IF - and I think this is true - the balconies are there for sun shading to meet LEED requirements without significantly reducing the percentage of vision glass on the façade (in favour of opaque spandrel panels) -
I'd say the fancy balconies are a better option than spandrel or smaller windows.
I do agree that the dodging around of their placement to make the buildings look "interesting" is a bit haphazard.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Changing City
Here's the Development Permit render of the proposed hotel next to the Exchange, on West Pender. Image is from site sign, published on Changing City blog. Ignore the strange circular addition to the side of the building - it was raining!

|
Thanks for posting.
It would be nice if they rendered the adjacent buildings more accurately and in their actual colours.
I think that the red-brown vertical strips would work with the brick of the building on the left.
The dark gray mullions and glass, plus the verticality of the red-brown strips, might also work with the vertical mullions on the Exchange Tower to the right.
The question is whether they work well together on the same façade.
It would have been nice if they stepped the tower on the side facing The Exchange - and gone a couple storeys taller to create a fitting puzzle piece appearance.