Tothewest said:
Interesting article. Certainly I dont think it makes any sense to compare an Event Centre or BMO, to community rec facilities or the green line. The first 2, while having local benefit, are economic drivers in that they bring the outside to Calgary. Those short term lifts that fill hotels, restaurants, ect... Community rec facilities, parks, affordable housing public transit ect are all annual operational losses that you take on to provide ease and quality of life to your citizens...but they dont directly help you economically, it's more of a wholistic vision that hopefully drives people to move here . If all we ever did was invest in those, the city would be "boring", but operate well. If it was the inverse, we'd be a tourist mecca but a horseshit place to live. You need to do both.


True. I'll go to the grave that the Olympics were a huge missed opportunity for the city, given what we already have in play to use, the external investment that we'll never see now. Just a calamity in how it was rolled out
Click to expand...
Almost no venues from the 88 olympics would have been suitable. It would have cost us tens of billions. Yeah, one big missed opportunity.
 
Sambo said:
Almost no venues from the 88 olympics would have been suitable. It would have cost us tens of billions. Yeah, one big missed opportunity.
Click to expand...

nothing in this sentence is true, but go off king!

They'd have had to build a village, everything else was existing facilities with some renovations that were already planned. Arenas outside calgary would have supplemented (edm/rd).
 
Had a chance to walk through the new BMO as part of Sneak a Peak at Stampede tonight. I have to say, the upper levels are beautifully done and the outdoor plaza works well as a gathering place. The only thing I didn't understand was in the new A halls they have put the washrooms outside the halls. Not a big deal for Stampede but for a ticketed event it seems extremely odd to me that you would force your patrons to leave the venue just to go to the washroom and then line up again for re-entry.

They also decided against putting concessions in the A halls and appear to have removed the concessions that used to exist in the B and C halls. Not providing anywhere to purchase food inside the halls also seems like an extremely odd decision. I suppose whoever rents the space in then on the hook for food concessions but does having a food stall on the floor without a kitchen area to cook mean we are doomed to sandwiches and potato chip bags for all future events?
 
1720417011112.png

Source: https://www.reddit.com/user/PaleontologistLazy67/
 
Is that lawn the final landscaping? Or is it temporary for Stampede, with a more complete and enticing design to come?

Edit: NVM. Looking back at the old DP submission (page 13 of this thread) that appears to be it.
 
Last edited:
www.archpaper.com

Populous faces Calgary’s BMO Centre with copper-colored metal panels

Designed by Populous, the new BMO Centre is clad in rusticated composite metal panels, a materiality that evokes associations to barn siding and belt buckles. Likewise, the building’s sweeping form was drawn from a bevy of nature-inspired metaphors.
www.archpaper.com www.archpaper.com

Never heard this about the cladding:

The facade panels’ copper color signifies numerous references to western life. According to Paulitsch, the material conjures many associations, including “the sheen of a belt buckle, the patina of a spur, a pressed penny at the State Fair.” Color variation was also introduced across horizontal segments of panels as an allusion to barn board siding.

I don't know the architecture world but there seems to be this almost endless effort to find meaning in everything.
 
Albertasaurus said:
/\Yeah some of those allusions and metaphors seem a bit far fetched. Sometimes I wish they'd drop the pretentious BS and just say "we did this because we thought it would look cool".
Click to expand...
100000%...as i've mentioned before...i want to start an agency who's sole motto is "things that look good, and mean nothing". Nobody gives a $^&% what it means, just make it look good for Calgary
 
It's not being pretentious. This is just how the design process works. There are any number of materials, colours, textures, shapes, you can use. To help guide your decisions, you begin with a concept and then make choices that seem in line with that concept.
 
I run a design studio myself, and having an overarching concept definitely helps to move the design process along, as well as to help bring (usually not particularly creative) clients on board by attaching a story to the idea. Having said that, there's definitely a fine line, and the amount of pure BS that gets loaded onto these things is ridiculous. Especially when there is lots of money involved and people on all sides feel they need a thick document to justify the costs.
 
DiscoStu said:
I run a design studio myself, and having an overarching concept definitely helps to move the design process along, as well as to help bring (usually not particularly creative) clients on board by attaching a story to the idea. Having said that, there's definitely a fine line, and the amount of pure BS that gets loaded onto these things is ridiculous. Especially when there is lots of money involved and people on all sides feel they need a thick document to justify the costs.
Click to expand...
I as well but I draw the line at reasoning for all decisions based on practical affects and impacts on users. Straight and to the point. None of that designer froufrou shit. Aesthetic choices are aesthetic choices and considerations are cohesion, longevity, cost, and availability etc. If clients don't like that I don't expound that the material choice reflects a period reminiscent of a time where you and they came together in broadening harmony as angels hummed the chorus of Over the Rainbow... You don't hire me for that. You hire me because my work is solid.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top