Today:

26264692519_9bbe8df309_b.jpg
 
Soooo they're still just testing the different materials for the white cladding, righhhhht?
 
I only see 2 types of white cladding: "hollow/shallow" ones, and flush ones. The hollow/shallow ones are simply missing a panel to make them flush. I don't think they are testing anything at all. I do think both kinds are the same, but the hollow/shallow ones are simply incomplete yet, unlike most of the other (flush) ones.
 
Miscreant said:
This is so poorly designed. The panels on the side are completely perfunctory.
Click to expand...
Not true. The floor plates alternate every three floors with rooms at one end having windows on just one of their two outside walls. As a design decision, it's the opposite of being perfunctory.

Is it successful in terms of its aesthetics? Some people simply won't like the design in its aspirations, but in terms of execution I think it's still too early to say: much of the design is still to be applied through balcony guards, and I am not sure we've seen the final version of the spandrel panels applied to the walls. At the end, if they don't achieve a smooth finish with the spandrel panels, then I'd say they'd have failed. I'm still hopeful that they can find the right material to make the design work.

42
 
interchange42 said:
Not true. The floor plates alternate every three floors with rooms at one end having windows on just one of their two outside walls. As a design decision, it's the opposite of being perfunctory.

Is it successful in terms of its aesthetics? Some people simply won't like the design in its aspirations, but in terms of execution I think it's still too early to say: much of the design is still to be applied through balcony guards, and I am not sure we've seen the final version of the spandrel panels applied to the walls. At the end, if they don't achieve a smooth finish with the spandrel panels, then I'd say they'd have failed. I'm still hopeful that they can find the right material to make the design work.

42
Click to expand...
I think the first half of your post uncharitably interprets my use of 'design' as referring to non-aesthetic facts about the building. So even though the argument is well-taken, I think it's misdirected. As for the aesthetic interpretation of 'design,' I take it we're at a standstill: you concede that it could turn out poorly, and I maintain that right now we already have reason to believe this will be the case.

So yeah, I'm willing to wait to make a final judgment.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top