In what way has it been botched?

42
 
I haven't paid too much attention to the heritage rebuild beyond the ground floor. The details are off on those light fixtures with the enormous mounts.
 
It's hard to believe that the same company (Oxford) that has achieved such great results with the heritage preservation of this tower is now planning the awful non-contextual reclad of its neighbours 130 and 120 Adelaide.
 
Thanks, @heatscore . Here is another photo I just found - the lights are pretty similar:

f1257_s1057_it0001.jpg
 

Attachments

  • f1257_s1057_it0001.jpg
    f1257_s1057_it0001.jpg
    156.2 KB · Views: 413
Skeezix said:
Correct me if I am mistaken (and I could be very wrong here), but are those lights not close reproductions of the lighting that was originally installed on the building when constructed?
Click to expand...

Does it really matter? It's not going to change my opinion on the bases of these fixtures.
 
Last edited:
So, please, no more posts in this thread re: the recladding of 120 and 130 Adelaide St East. Please continue that in the thread which @salsa has posted!

42
 
maestro said:
Does it really matter? It's not going to change my opinion on the bases of these fixtures.
Click to expand...

Well, it does matter. I wasn't saying you weren't entitled to your opinion. I also don't think that I tried even remotely to change your opinion. The fact that they have installed lights which reproduce the building's original lights is, however, relevant to your assertion that Oxford "botch[ed] up the rebuilt facade". I know you think (based on your post before you edited it) that they botched it up back then too, which is fine, but certainly the fact that they were reproducing the original design is germane to the discussion over what they did with this rebuild. I'm hard pressed to see how it doesn't matter, even if one person is unmoved by that particular fact.
 
Last edited:
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top