But we don't know that. aA is still involved and when have they ever delivered a poorly detailed project? We haven't even seen detailed elevation showing changes to material selections, if there even are any.
Regardless of how I feel about this project -- and I haven't given my opinion one way or another, as far as I can remember -- empty hyperbole adds nothing to the discussion. I'd like to hear what enrique8 finds so objectionable. BTW, empty praise does nothing for me either. I prefer posters who are specific in their criticism or praise, who account for their opinions.Not sure he or she is saying anything different than that's already been discussed here. Unless you like what Concord is doing, then in what's floating your boat, ask away...
Here’s a specific criticism: in the last render we see three different wall ‘treatments’ (sorry - I don’t know the right architectural terminology): fairly standard grey spandrel + balconies, white clad windows, and all capped off by a solid triangular cone - and there’s absolutely no cohesiveness to it all. It looks like three different people designed different parts of the building.^^^ Instead of spewing empty hyperbole, how about explaining what you find so egregious?
It looks even worse than Aura. At least Aura redeems itself on the top 1/3rd portion of the building with the relatively clean window treatment and lack of balconies. This thing is just balcony galore, with clear and evident poor quality spandrel lacing everywhere, with materials which just scream cheap from the renders to which Concord isnt even hiding.Frankly, it's looking like Aura 2.0 at this point.