Quote:
Originally Posted by jhausner
I always find these forums interesting in the sense that most people seem to be of the opinion that every highrise tower should be an architectural masterpiece when the reality is there isn't a city I think anywhere in the world where this is a reality.
Even if you look at Vancouver or Chicago or New York, 75% of the buildings in those cities are pretty generic box designed towers. Are they amazing? No. But that's how things happen. I'm more concerned about the street fronting than I am the towers themselves. I just see towers in Surrey right now as getting more population and more demand to the area. That in turn will drive more buildings and more chance for those architectural masterpieces.
Are these buildings great looking? Nope (though they are just renderings right now). But I'd rather see them built in their current form than to see some amazing design sit on a diagram in some architect's office for eternity like the majority of past Surrey developments have gone.
Then again maybe I just don't see the 'art' in building designs. I mean I've read people on here talk about Ultra like it is some great looking tower then the same people turn around and say the infinity towers look like garbage. To me they look pretty much the same. Modern towers with balconies and people living in them bringing demand to an area that is trying to densify.
|
You're missing the point I was making. I wasn't demanding architectural masterpieces. I was asking for architectural
honesty and simpler floorplans, such as the example I posted, which is basically a glass/spandrel slab. Vancouver's addiction to expensive point-tower massings - with all those zig-zag corners and setbacks - comes at a cost to design at the lower end of the market. That mentality killed the original design for Marine Gateway and gave us two generic turds instead.
Prev
Linear Mode
