Quote:
Originally Posted by djh
I just don't understand how this "inside exposed to the elements" design will work. Do the designers live in a bunker in Arizona and not know it rains for several months at a time here?
Look at the design and positioning of the skylights.Am I wrong in thinking they are not glassed over? Imagine water pouring in through that, not down 1, but down 2 floors down, into the bowels of the mall. Imagine birds flying around inside the mall. Imagine how quickly that wood will bleach on the sunward side, and gather mould/moss on the shadowed sign. And not in a good way.
This just seems like an architectural fantasy from a 1980s science fiction book showing "Life In The Future After The Reset" - far from practical but major "Gattaca" vibes.
|
Quote:
Originally Posted by s211
I call 1000% BS on the greenery hanging on the inside of the skylights, unless they intend to put fake greenery. It would be wildly expensive to maintain.
More architectural greenwashing for ya, folks.
|
Yeah, there's also the fact that there would be spillage to some degree from the rain yielding more maintenance and clean up demands.
Now that you guys got me thinking, it simply doesn't make sense to have it open air. Like yeah, do the skylight by all means (with possibly fake plants hanging), but the upkeep and maintenance of it from the rain in an open air scenario seems a little dumb and short sighted. I also get that they are trying to move away from being classified as just another mall but sometimes malls are indeed appropriate for certain locations (as much as we get wet over the idea of high streets), especially when they are mixed use with office and residential like this proposal is.
TLDR: They're trying to masquerade as an open market, when indeed they are another mall.
To me, it looks too greenwashed to be true.