Quote:
Originally Posted by VelvetElvis
As far as the Conference Center... mudane and clinical? I don't see many buildings covered in gardens. You might have an argument for clinical if you are refering to the cold, austere quality of the marble and granite as well as the Neoclassic appropriations. It's not my favorite building because it could use a bit more humanity, but I've never really understood why it makes so many shit lists.
|
The auditorium seems fairly attractive on the inside, but definitely lacks anything that would catch the eye on the exterior.
Regarding the LDS Conference Center, I tend to think more along your line VelvetElvis. Of course, no building, no matter how exceptional many of it's features are, is liked by everyone. From many site lines and aspects of it's design, the Conference Center is nothing less than magnificient, and IMO it would be superfluous to dismiss most of it. I think the hundreds of photo's taken regularly by droves of visiting photographers bears that out. I love the way it's terraced, garden walls engage the neighborhoods to the north and east. Also, it's corner street engagement at the southwest and southeast is very attractive in my opinion. Then of course, there is the roof gardens, many water features and main auditorium, which is second to none in the world. I think the North Temple side has some excellent aspects, such as the water falls, including the city creek curbside appeal. However, portions of the masonary design IMO is too austere along North Temple.
It's also interesting to note that it has won numerous and varied national/international awards for a host of it's features.