I still dislike the podiums and how it conceals the base of the tower, (when the tower should be emphasized as a stand-alone piece), and the fact that the facade is a poor imitation of the actual tower texture... either make it completely different or the same! I also think that the chunk southeast of Granville should not be part of this project, but saved for the development opposite it maintain a uniform architecture on either side of the bridge, (Aa || bB instead of Aa || aB). At least they've simplified the geometry of the cavities, because the previous version looked really 80's with the chamfered corners.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Prometheus
I respect this building's boldness and originality (at least for Vancouver) and I hope it gets built (rather than another dull mediocrity). But I won't pretend the tower is beautiful. It is top-heavy and unbalanced.
That said, it will be a healthy break in the monotony.
|
The tower threw me off initially, since I think skylines look best with the classic Manhattan massing (fat low-rise, skinny high-rise) but I've begun to love how gravity-defying and improbable this thing looks. The tower looks like it's in the process of being beamed in, materializing in little cubes from the sky downward. Definitely shifted my perception of beauty.
I hope there are some terraces at the top concealed by the facade extension, assuming that a green roof is a given.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Metro-One
Surprisingly this proposal has gathered 0 responses on the Canadian threads......
|
Some people only fap to 200m boxes.