The red brick "heritage" building - that's not original, is it?
It's a "recreation" I assume? So many elements of the original are missing.

On the other hand, the prethora of mullions on the tower above do seem to relate well to the very busy brickwork of the adjacent heritage building to the east (moreso in the pics before the juliet balcony glass was added).
 
Great...the next time I pass by this building, I'll remind myself to drink to forget about this building...my earlier attempts in doing so nearly worked...until I looked at this thread again lol.
 
Trees going in.
1706FDB3-65B3-45BF-9448-3CE1B4F4D21C.jpeg
4674A507-9E3B-4073-96A2-005006DCE083.jpeg
 
Kirkor remain one of the more iffier architects around for executing details, but with a developer that doesn't care about aesthetic results then this was DOA. The Waverley one block west looks messy on certain aspects but it isn't fully horrendous like this one. The heritage rebuild here is also pretty much bordering on Disney World Main Street USA level schlockery.
 
Kirkor remain one of the more iffier architects around for executing details, but with a developer that doesn't care about aesthetic results then this was DOA. The Waverley one block west looks messy on certain aspects but it isn't fully horrendous like this one. The heritage rebuild here is also pretty much bordering on Disney World Main Street USA level schlockery.
If Kirkor is the constant, but the developer is not… then maybe it has more to do with the developer going cheap cheap cheap. If a developer will only pay for the cheapest exterior, then it's going to be small panes of glass and/or aluminum, and mullions everywhere, including at waist-height through windows, and somehow three bands through the slab edge areas here. Sure, Kirkor is willing to work for these cheap developers, but some company is going to get the work, and Kirkor, like any other architectural firm, has employees to pay, and has to compete.

42
 

Back
Top