Telus Sky

[Magnum PEI]

To each their own I guess but I think this building is horrifying. It looks more like a German factory than an office building. And it's not that great on the inside, which kind of defeats the purpose.
It has a few decades on it, but for me Telus is a far nicer design.

[getbak]

That Lloyd's building looks like it could be part of the Heavy-oil Upgrader in Lloydminster.

[You Need a Thneed]

Bjarke Ingels' Project Website

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by Table 5

1. I'm surprised Telus didn't find a way to work a dancing hippo into the design.

2. You can thank the Encana and its Bow for this level of design. It set the standard for quality in signature architecture for the city, and if anyone now wants to impress they have to really step it up too. Calling up Gibbs Gage to fart out a tower is no longer enough if you want to be considered amongst the big boys.

That's always been the hope of architects; that a few great buildings might force all the GGs and Stantec's of the City to actually design things half decent instead of the bland work they currently do.

Super impressed that BIG is doing something in Calgary! now if a OMA, Zaha, Herzog or Zumthor get picked for the central library, i would be ecstatic!

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by You Need a Thneed

Recent Renderings from the Land Use application:

sadly, this is just a poor facsimile of Herzog and de Meuron's brilliant Miami parkade.

http://www.archdaily.com/59266/1111-...zog-de-meuron/

[pylon]

Originally Posted by CaptainYooh

Again, you are applying technical evaluation criteria to justify your personal aesthetic preferences. I believe this is a wrong and dangerous approach, (especially when used by the people in approving authorities), as it leads to creating architectural monstrosities and eyesores that "grace" city skylines forever and become "familiar monstrosities and eyesores". Calgary downtown architecture has been dominated by the same four largest architectural firms for too long; hence, craving for something exciting and out-of-the-ordinary is understandable. Unfortunately, this also means that anything non-straight and asymmetric is easily welcomed and heralded as world-class. It is not always the case.

In summary, I think our positions on this building are now quite clear and simple: you like it and I don't.

You are the peter12 of buildings.

[MrMastodonFarm]

Originally Posted by oldschoolcalgary

sadly, this is just a poor facsimile of Herzog and de Meuron's brilliant Miami parkade.

http://www.archdaily.com/59266/1111-...zog-de-meuron/

Don't know why that's sad though.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by MrMastodonFarm

Don't know why that's sad though.

its sad because they borrowed the form, but they are not as talented as HdeM...

Homes by Avi can design houses and call them "inspired by Frank Lloyd Wright", but there's more to a great project than a few similar details...

Authenticity makes a difference; everyone's seen the Mona Lisa in pictures. Seeing it in real life is a much different thing. Its much more powerful in real life, even if that is only a mental contruct.

[polak]

The only thing different about the Mona Lisa in real life is that it's much smaller than you expect and to look at it, you have to first put up with gypsy's trying to swindle you and being molested by Asian tourists.

[oldschoolcalgary]

Originally Posted by polak

The only thing different about the Mona Lisa in real life is that it's much smaller than you expect and to look at it, you have to first put up with gypsy's trying to swindle you and being molested by Asian tourists.

well, that and the fact that DaVinci actually worked on it...

Authenticity makes a difference. Why do you think people are mesmerized by seeing the Stanley Cup in person? Not because its a beautiful thing, but because you are in the presence of something bigger than yourself.