What do you think of this project?

  • Total voters
    22
It is not offensive, but it is a very weak delivery both creatively and basic-rule-of design. It is as if the designer didnt even put effort in it.
 
IanO said:
These are ubiquitous and found in any city.
Click to expand...
I don't get why this needs to be defended. It's not like a better design would be more expensive. You can use the same materials and make it so much better just by changing the massing. Why are we so quick to accept "inoffensive" (which is putting it lightly in my opinion) architecture when it doesn't even need to be that way?
 
Given the location, I would hope for something of higher quality. This isn't a low traffic area. Just because something exists elsewhere doesn't mean it isn't open to criticism. That said, offensive design is subjective, so many of us may find it offensive while Ian does not and that is okay.
 
This is why critique is so important. We should be asking for higher standards no matter where in the City developments are located. Isn't that at least a part of the "on the qui vive" for this Skyrise Cities platform? If your standards for excellent design are sloppily low then you either don't really care or, worse, you don't know any better. We should all constantly push for higher standards. Quality design needs not be expensive and some lazy solutions just ignore that fact. This project is mediocre at best and could have/should have been a lot better.
 
IanO said:
These are ubiquitous and found in any city.
Click to expand...

EtoV said:
I don't get why this needs to be defended. It's not like a better design would be more expensive. You can use the same materials and make it so much better just by changing the massing. Why are we so quick to accept "inoffensive" (which is putting it lightly in my opinion) architecture when it doesn't even need to be that way?
Click to expand...

Yes, these types of designs are ubiquitous and found in any city; yet nicer types of designs that are found in other cities seem to not be found in Edmonton to a similar or comparable extent. So I agree @EtoV can we push and advocate for designs that are better than "inoffensive" or "found in any other city"? Not every project has to be an architectural award winning gem but it would be great if more projects had more architectural appeal than what this looks like so far, especially in a prominent location.
 
archited said:
This is why critique is so important. We should be asking for higher standards no matter where in the City developments are located. Isn't that at least a part of the "on the qui vive" for this Skyrise Cities platform? If your standards for excellent design are sloppily low then you either don't really care or, worse, you don't know any better. We should all constantly push for higher standards. Quality design needs not be expensive and some lazy solutions just ignore that fact. This project is mediocre at best and could have/should have been a lot better.
Click to expand...

I agree, I think also we have a problem in this city where the subjectively subpar architecture firms seem to be getting a decent amount of the business. I won't name names but we all know who they are. This frustrates me because we do have some outstanding firms here that are forward thinking. Now I don't work in the industry so I can't give an educated guess as to why, is it marketing? Is it cost?
 
Ah yes, the classic chicken and the egg.

Our market supports rents in the $2-2.50/sqft and we support $250-450sqft for condos... and so most developers need to adjust accordingly. When you are in Toronto you get $3+ and 700-1200 a foot... latitude is great!

*as archited mentioned, good design does can or does not cost more.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top