HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia


View Poll Results: What do you think?
A new bar has been set! 73 46.79%
It's great 59 37.82%
Good but not great 20 12.82%
I don't like it at all 4 2.56%
Voters: 156. You may not vote on this poll

Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #41  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:06 PM
Thinner6's Avatar
Thinner6 Thinner6 is offline
Hypnotized
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris550 View Post
I actually very much doubt that. It just isn't in a particularly photogenic or touristy location. The Bow has Centre Street, Centennial/Canterra the Waterfront... others on Stephen Ave. This building is kinda in the middle of nowhere.
Isn't that exactly what people were complaining about? How all of our tall buildings are at the one end of the downtown (aside from Nexen) and that we need a bit more balance? People are praising The Bow because they believe it will begin a revival of the east part of the downtown, so why can't this project garner similar praise because it might spark some good sized projects in the core's west end.

Big projects = more people working in them. More people working in them = more pedestrial traffic and a busier area.

Wouldn't adding a 200+ meter building in this location help this problem out in some respects?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #42  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:11 PM
Boris2k7's Avatar
Boris2k7 Boris2k7 is offline
Majestic
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Calgary
Posts: 12,010
Yes, and I'm not saying that's a bad thing or that it's a problem. I'm just saying that as the area is, it is not a busy area and there is really nothing to anchor it. I'm not sure if this building can achieve that, the Bow is grander in scope.
__________________
"The only thing that gets me through our winters is the knowledge that they're the only thing keeping us free of giant ass spiders." -MonkeyRonin

Flickr
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #43  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:12 PM
Thinner6's Avatar
Thinner6 Thinner6 is offline
Hypnotized
 
Join Date: May 2006
Location: Calgary
Posts: 551
Quote:
Originally Posted by Boris550 View Post
Yes, and I'm not saying that's a bad thing or that it's a problem. I'm just saying that as the area is, it is not a busy area and there is really nothing to anchor it. I'm not sure if this building can achieve that, the Bow is grander in scope.
This seems like a good anchor to me. Or at least a good start.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #44  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:17 PM
Habanero's Avatar
Habanero Habanero is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dynamic city near the Rockies
Posts: 2,298
Excellent project IMO. A couple of things;

1) Arriviste, I know that everyone has their own personal taste, but what kind of high rise would like to see in instead??

2) Re: the comparison to the trump tower. Yes, they looks similar, but the thing most people don't like about the Trump tower is the spire, and this one's is much better, which makes it a better looking tower IMO.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #45  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:25 PM
jeffwhit's Avatar
jeffwhit jeffwhit is offline
effete latte-lifter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Aalborg, DK
Posts: 3,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arch26 View Post
"Lovely design"? Come on... it's been done. It's just a post-modern collection of recycled bits from previous eras. If the city should do anything consistently, it should be to take risks and to innovate... not re-incarnate design ideas which have had their day in the sun.
Condescension sure is an effective way of getting people to understand your viewpoint!
__________________
Arts!: Click to listen
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #46  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:26 PM
Arriviste's Avatar
Arriviste Arriviste is offline
What we play is life.
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by Habanero View Post
Excellent project IMO. A couple of things;

1) Arriviste, I know that everyone has their own personal taste, but what kind of high rise would like to see in instead??

2) Re: the comparison to the trump tower. Yes, they looks similar, but the thing most people don't like about the Trump tower is the spire, and this one's is much better, which makes it a better looking tower IMO.
An Answer to postulation 1: The Bow.

In all honesty, I'd like to see something that took the architect more than an afternoon to conceptualize. This is just lazy, unoriginal architecture. Its design by committee crap that panders to the widest possible cross section of society which is its single biggest issue. I can understand the reasoning behind doing so, but I can't appreciate that rationale. This is merely a building, not art which is a god damned shame. When budgets as large as this is presumably, I would prefer to see something that took talent, imagination, and more than an afternoon flipping through an architectural history book browsing for details from history to pillage. This thing just lacks a conceptual foot to stand on, and for that I hate it.
Like a Robert Bateman painting. Sure it takes skill I guess, but technical ability and imagination are two very different things.
__________________
I shut my eyes in order to see.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #47  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:29 PM
Habanero's Avatar
Habanero Habanero is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Dec 2006
Location: Dynamic city near the Rockies
Posts: 2,298
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arriviste View Post
An Answer to postulation 1: The Bow.

In all honesty, I'd like to see something that took the architect more than an afternoon to conceptualize. This is just lazy, unoriginal architecture. Its design by committee crap that panders to the widest possible cross section of society which is its single biggest issue. I can understand the reasoning behind doing so, but I can't appreciate that rationale. This is merely a building, not art which is a god damned shame. When budgets as large as this is presumably, I would prefer to see something that took talent, imagination, and more than an afternoon flipping through an architectural history book browsing for details from history to pillage. This thing just lacks a conceptual foot to stand on, and for that I hate it.
Like a Robert Bateman painting. Sure it takes skill I guess, but technical ability and imagination are two very different things.
I like the Bow as well, but surely there must be some other examples. I'm not trying to be a pain here, I just want to have some understanding of what would be better, and also fit someone's budget. Obviously, LaCaille doesn't have a billion dollars to spend on this.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #48  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:33 PM
freeweed's Avatar
freeweed freeweed is offline
Home of Hyperchange
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Dynamic City, Alberta
Posts: 17,566
When the only people saying anything negative about a project are the ones who hate just about everything, and when the negative comments work out to "it's not the absolute best thing possible, so it's CRAP"...

I think we have a winner!

So what is this, 5(?) major tower projects all within a couple of blocks of each other this decade? And all of them an improvement on our downtown (some less than others, admittedly). And anchored by the already-impressive Canterra. This is going to be one hell of a nice part of downtown in 5 years.

Livingston
Centennial
City Centre
La Caille
Jamieson

Am I missing any?
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #49  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:42 PM
DrJoe's Avatar
DrJoe DrJoe is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2002
Location: TO, ON
Posts: 2,624
Quote:
Originally Posted by CMD UW View Post
Very Toronto-ish design, I like it alot.

8.5/10
Very un-Toronto if you ask me. Toronto does not do PoMo...unless you're in North York somewhere.
__________________
*
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #50  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:43 PM
Bad Grizzly's Avatar
Bad Grizzly Bad Grizzly is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Posts: 1,178
^agreed, this one looks to be an easy winner. Those who voted negatively are ones who would have voted negatively regardless of the project, Although in the case of Arriviste, he is simply a very picky person. He would give a good vote if the project suited him.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #51  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:50 PM
Grendel's Avatar
Grendel Grendel is offline
Dr Morgan, AME
 
Join Date: Feb 2007
Location: Mission, Calgary
Posts: 233
I think it's disgustingly ostentatious. I think it screams an unsubtle and unseemly lust for money. I think it pretty much embodies everything that's wrong with Calgary right now.

Now pardon me while I go hide under my desk.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #52  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:50 PM
Arriviste's Avatar
Arriviste Arriviste is offline
What we play is life.
 
Join Date: Nov 2004
Location: Calgary, Canada
Posts: 1,517
Quote:
Originally Posted by freeweed View Post
When the only people saying anything negative about a project are the ones who hate just about everything, and when the negative comments work out to "it's not the absolute best thing possible, so it's CRAP"...

I think we have a winner!

So what is this, 5(?) major tower projects all within a couple of blocks of each other this decade? And all of them an improvement on our downtown (some less than others, admittedly). And anchored by the already-impressive Canterra. This is going to be one hell of a nice part of downtown in 5 years.

Livingston
Centennial
City Centre
La Caille
Jamieson

Am I missing any?
Thats kind of harsh. I have given a pretty good rational for why I dislike the building. Your inability to process/understand that which I have stated seems to be the larger issue. I respect you opinion to like the building, and can understand why some would. In return I'd appreciate you not unfairly citing my preferences as questionable without asserting a half decent answer as to why you believe me to be wrong. A laughing smiley is a laughable response to what has so far been an intriguing conversation. Tell me why I am wrong freeweed, and I will respect the answer if it has any merit.

Heres a concise list detailing my reasoning:
-unimaginative derivation of antiquated ideals
-unrepresentative of todays technology/sensibilities
-lacking in a conceptual basis that challenges anything existing
-Not honest to the time it was designed, the location it is to be erected, or to the occupants inside

Shall I continue? Or have I given you enough to consider?
__________________
I shut my eyes in order to see.

Last edited by Arriviste; Aug 3, 2007 at 7:57 PM. Reason: grammatical error
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #53  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:53 PM
Tobyoby's Avatar
Tobyoby Tobyoby is offline
That's what she said
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Stampitectureville
Posts: 1,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
I think it's disgustingly ostentatious. I think it screams an unsubtle and unseemly lust for money. I think it pretty much embodies everything that's wrong with Calgary right now.

Now pardon me while I go hide under my desk.
Thanks for revealing that. Your vote no longer counts.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #54  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:54 PM
chuber chuber is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Edmonton
Posts: 213
I think it is hot!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #55  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:54 PM
Bigtime's Avatar
Bigtime Bigtime is offline
Very tall. Such Scrape.
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Posts: 17,731
Quote:
Originally Posted by Grendel View Post
I think it's disgustingly ostentatious. I think it screams an unsubtle and unseemly lust for money. I think it pretty much embodies everything that's wrong with Calgary right now.

Now pardon me while I go hide under my desk.
Now I'm not lumping this project in with the greats of the last 100 years or so but...didn't New York's best buildings come from that same "lust for money"? Or is it just ridiculous spending of said money?

Just stirring it up a little on a sunny Friday!
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #56  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:57 PM
Pavlov's Avatar
Pavlov Pavlov is offline
Khan
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Kingston, Ontario
Posts: 4,915
I don't like the design, but this building will be great for that area of downtown. Its really great to see some residential in the business district.
__________________
Confucius says:
With coarse rice to eat, with water to drink, and my bended arm for a pillow - I have still joy in the midst of these things. Riches and honors acquired by unrighteousness are to me as a floating cloud.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #57  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:58 PM
Arch26 Arch26 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2006
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 403
Quote:
Originally Posted by jeffwhit View Post
Condescension sure is an effective way of getting people to understand your viewpoint!
I didn't mean to be condescending, but I really do have to agree with Arriviste. I might not go so far as to say that I hate it, but let's face it, it is not innovative. It's been done. It's recycled. It has been transplanted from other times and other cities into a context that really doesn't particularly suit it. Calgary does not have a long history, and so I don't understand why we try to emulate a past that is not our own instead. So why do we borrow architectural styles from 1920s New York? Why doesn't Calgary want to invent its own contemporary architectural language? Why must it always resort to "emulating". I know this city can do better, and THAT is why I am so critical. It's not because I hate every project that comes out, it's because a lot of these projects are lazy and uninspired as Arriviste has indicated and I think there can be better. Why is it wrong to demand a little innovation? Why is it wrong not to be satisfied with status quo? I have no doubt that La Caille on 4th probably has the potential to be a competent building, but I don't think Calgary's architectural/urban community should simply settle for competent.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #58  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 7:59 PM
Tobyoby's Avatar
Tobyoby Tobyoby is offline
That's what she said
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Stampitectureville
Posts: 1,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arriviste View Post
Thats kind of harsh. I have given a pretty good rational for why I dislike the building. Your inability to process/understand that which I have stated seems to be the larger issue. I respect you opinion to like the building, and can understand why some would. In return I'd appreciate you not unfairly citing my preferences as questionable without asserting a half decent answer as to why you believe me to be wrong. A laughing smiley is a laughable response to what has so far been an intriguing conversation. Tell me why I am wrong freeweed, and I will respect the answer if it has any merit.

Heres a concise point for list of my reasoning:
-unimaginative derivation of antiquated ideals
-unrepresentative of todays technology/sensibilities
-lacking in a conceptual basis that challenges anything existing
-Not honest to the time it was designed, the location it is to be erected, or to the occupants inside

Shall I continue? Or have I given you enough to consider?
I don't think it's a matter of right or wrong, it's just that the nay sayers often put down these renderings and never show examples of what would be good. It's easy to sit back and criticize, without giving examples of your argument.

I'd like to see examples of what you like, because I believe you have given lots of thought to this and would like to see good projects for Calgary, not like some of the others who's critiques are politically motivated.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #59  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 8:02 PM
Tobyoby's Avatar
Tobyoby Tobyoby is offline
That's what she said
 
Join Date: Mar 2007
Location: Stampitectureville
Posts: 1,509
Quote:
Originally Posted by Arch26 View Post
I didn't mean to be condescending, but I really do have to agree with Arriviste. I might not go so far as to say that I hate it, but let's face it, it is not innovative. It's been done. It's recycled. It has been transplanted from other times and other cities into a context that really doesn't particularly suit it. Calgary does not have a long history, and so I don't understand why we try to emulate a past that is not our own instead. So why do we borrow architectural styles from 1920s New York? Why doesn't Calgary want to invent its own contemporary architectural language? Why must it always resort to "emulating". I know this city can do better, and THAT is why I am so critical. It's not because I hate every project that comes out, it's because a lot of these projects are lazy and uninspired as Arriviste has indicated and I think there can be better. Why is it wrong to demand a little innovation? Why is it wrong not to be satisfied with status quo? I have no doubt that La Caille on 4th probably has the potential to be a competent building, but I don't think Calgary's architectural/urban community should simply settle for competent.
I agree on that point. It's great to demand some innovation, but be careful what you wish for, just look to Dubai as an example.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #60  
Old Posted Aug 3, 2007, 8:05 PM
jeffwhit's Avatar
jeffwhit jeffwhit is offline
effete latte-lifter
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: Aalborg, DK
Posts: 3,689
Quote:
Originally Posted by DrJoe View Post
Very un-Toronto if you ask me. Toronto does not do PoMo...unless you're in North York somewhere.
oh please.
__________________
Arts!: Click to listen
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Regional Sections > Canada > Alberta & British Columbia
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 8:21 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.