Quote:
Originally Posted by sfcity1
I was never a big fan of SOM, but their rendering blows away the competition in my mind. The SOM building is graceful, futuristic, wavy, trend setting, and very unique, all very strong charactersitics of SF. The Richard Rogers building does not belong in SF as it looks industrial and gritty. Finally, Pelli has reproduced this design in many locations. It is not at all unique and a clone of a building should not be the height defining centerpiece of the SF skyline.
|
This basically sums up my thoughts. I love Pelli because he's one of the only guys out there who is still willing and able to do symmetrical buildings, but damn it -- how many more times is he going to reuse the same friggin shape? Hong kong's 2IFC and Jersey City, NJ's Goldman Sachs tower immediately spring to mind when looking at this one.
And about Rogers' proposal, it looks like it came out of the oven half-baked.. lots of great ideas, but the overal design is utterly lacking in refinement. This is the one I want to like the most, but as of now there's just too much
stuff going on with it to effectively work as a skyline piece.
So SOM it is for me. It's oh-so-hip, yet classy at the same time, and for that I feel it would age well.
**
HOWEVER, it should be noted that SOM's renderings are by far the slickest ones, so I wouldn't be surprised if people started changing their minds a bit if Pelli or Rogers released some more shiny renders of their own.