I'm gonna agree with Mountain Man on this one.

I can deal with bland, boring, hell even beige buildings but this one (if the final result doesn't look drastically different) is really low effort and quality. It's going to have significant visibility, it's bad publicity for the aesthetic of the city, much like The Hub which is quite unanimously hated by anyone who drives by.
Space isn't lacking in Calgary, I think we can afford not filling every infill at all cost, especially if it's a park and not an empty parking lot.
 
My hope is that the architects tried out a variety of color combinations of siding and mesh when doing the digital renderings. Back in the day when I used to goof around with 3D work, I used to do a building and choose multiple colors and materials etc.. to see which ones looked the best.
 
If this building was made into a book, its title would be ‘1 Shade of Gray’ lol
IMG_4604.jpeg
 
Mountain Man said:
I'm amazed by the apathetic response to this hideous building that is super prominent for so many people driving into the city centre. How in the hell is an ugly grey box looming over the flyover better than the park with a couple trees that was there before, or worth a shit-tastic design just because it's close to an overpass? Every single time I will drive into downtown on the flyover I'll cringe at this fugly beast.
Click to expand...
In the same tone, why do we give a shit about some loser in a car on an ugly flyover? What material impact does catering to the momentary aesthetics of a car commuter have?

It does have a material impact on actual humans who are looking for affordable housing. Some douche in a lifted suburban who is annoyed at a private parcel on their way from Cranston?... Meh

Or, in another way: As a pedestrian and cyclist I have to deal with looking at the ugly flyover you use every day, and deal with real material impacts to the human realm below it; disconnected routes, noise, pollution, etc. How come it gets a pass in your mind, but actual housing doesn't?
 
Last edited:
Ramsayite said:
In the same tone, why do we give a shit about some loser in a car on an ugly flyover? What material impact does catering to the momentary aesthetics of a car commuter have?

It does have a material impact on actual humans who are looking for affordable housing. Some douche in a lifted suburban who is annoyed at a private parcel on their way from Cranston?... Meh

Or, in another way: As a pedestrian and cyclist I have to deal with looking at the ugly flyover you use every day, and deal with real material impacts to the human realm below it; disconnected routes, noise, pollution, etc. How come it gets a pass in your mind, but actual housing doesn't?
Click to expand...
I agree 100% about not caring about the aesthetics of this building, what I don’t get is the hate on for someone driving a car. Was it necessary to label drivers as losers and douches to make your point?
I drive over the flyover 2-3 times a week, so does that make me a loser, or the equivalent of a douchbag from Cranston? Or just because someone drives a vehicle they aren’t allowed an opinion on how something looks?
 
Ramsayite said:
In the same tone, why do we give a shit about some loser in a car on an ugly flyover? What material impact does catering to the momentary aesthetics of a car commuter have?

It does have a material impact on actual humans who are looking for affordable housing. Some douche in a lifted suburban who is annoyed at a private parcel on their way from Cranston?... Meh

Or, in another way: As a pedestrian and cyclist I have to deal with looking at the ugly flyover you use every day, and deal with real material impacts to the human realm below it; disconnected routes, noise, pollution, etc. How come it gets a pass in your mind, but actual housing doesn't?
Click to expand...
Carz r bad! Demolish the flyover!
 
Ramsayite said:
In the same tone, why do we give a shit about some loser in a car on an ugly flyover? What material impact does catering to the momentary aesthetics of a car commuter have?

It does have a material impact on actual humans who are looking for affordable housing. Some douche in a lifted suburban who is annoyed at a private parcel on their way from Cranston?... Meh

Or, in another way: As a pedestrian and cyclist I have to deal with looking at the ugly flyover you use every day, and deal with real material impacts to the human realm below it; disconnected routes, noise, pollution, etc. How come it gets a pass in your mind, but actual housing doesn't?
Click to expand...
Well you're kind of a dick aren't you. Everyone gets to experience the city equally, why should only pedestrians and cyclists enjoy a nice cityscape? Shouldn't this affordable housing you are so proud of actually look like something respectable, not a big grey turd?
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top