Arris - 5th and Third | 142.03m | 41s | Embassy Bosa | Amanat Architect

General rating of the project

  • Great

    Votes: 9 9.6%

  • Very good

    Votes: 45 47.9%

  • Good

    Votes: 29 30.9%

  • So So

    Votes: 7 7.4%

  • Not Very Good

    Votes: 3 3.2%

  • Terrible

    Votes: 1 1.1%
  • Total voters
    94
I think they're just very poor cartoonish renderings, they've been up on that site for a bit now. If the outcome of the materials used for the finishing is like the ones in the renderings on this site, coupled with the height of 42 stories, it could turn out to be pretty nice.
 
I don't find them to be cartoonish at all. They're easily the most photo-realistic renderings we've seen of this project so far, hence why they needed to be posted here.
 
Always love a good render or two. Thanks for posting UW! I don't mind the towers, my only complaint would be that they are a bit generic looking, but other than that I don't have nay issues with them.
 
Turns it back on the river? You surely mean turn its back on a embankment. Besides the upper floors of the drop in centre, I doubt there is even a view point where that view is even possible to see.
upload_2018-2-20_10-11-32.png

https://www.google.ca/maps/@51.0480...wXSREC6EJy2lKPDPquEA!2e0!7i13312!8i6656?hl=en
 

Attachments

  • upload_2018-2-20_10-11-32.png
    upload_2018-2-20_10-11-32.png
    912.4 KB · Views: 521
The tower designs were much nicer when this project was first announced IMO.
Amazing what value engineering can do. :(
 
Funny, while I do find the towers boring, I personally have more issues with the podium. There are about half a dozen different designs going on, none of them are particularly interesting, and each is one is clashing with the other. What a mish-mash of mediocrity.

I also agree that it does a poor job in terms of the river side. That side gets a ton of car traffic...you'd think at the very least they'd want to maximize the ability to advertise to all those passersby.
 
I'm not sure I agree about it "turning it's back on the river". The building needs a backside - for loading area - and the slip lane off 5 Ave is the best for it IMO. Although 3 St is also a candidate, it wouldn't fit in with the complete street plan they have there. I would be more concerned if it turned it's back onto the community, but looks like we've got decent 6 Ave and 4 St frontage (also not too crazy about the design itself). I would be more inclined to agree with the argument if 5 Ave wasn't raised and impassable, and you could actually see the river from there.
 
Agreed, I think the location for the loading area is perfect. The north side is the one side of the building that has no interaction with anything except the 5th ave flyover. 6th ave is the most important side of the building from a community standpoint.
 
DiscoStu said:
Funny, while I do find the towers boring, I personally have more issues with the podium. There are about half a dozen different designs going on, none of them are particularly interesting, and each is one is clashing with the other. What a mish-mash of mediocrity.

I also agree that it does a poor job in terms of the river side. That side gets a ton of car traffic...you'd think at the very least they'd want to maximize the ability to advertise to all those passersby.
Click to expand...

I'm on the fence about the podium. On one hand it is a mish mash of styles, but on the other hand I'm not a fan of large whole block podiums that are primarily one style. I think I prefer the mish mash style to be honest.
 
I agree. The podium is looking worse and worse. I do applaud the attempt to break up the massing but, it's too forced and commercialized. It looks like a Mills mall. The towers designs are innocuous if one of them wasn't 44 floors and the tallest in area.
 
Surrealplaces said:
I'm on the fence about the podium. On one hand it is a mish mash of styles, but on the other hand I'm not a fan of large whole block podiums that are primarily one style. I think I prefer the mish mash style to be honest.
Click to expand...

I'm not a fan of large whole block podiums either but I don't think this solves the problem or fools anyone into thinking they are in the midst of some charming shopping street. It looks fake and forced...indeed like a Mills mall. I think they would've been better off to keep the aesthetic consistent, but break it up with different massing throughout the block.
 
I was referring to how the entire back side of the building is almost totally a windowless megalith. Not just the loading zone. Of course buildings need loading zones.
 
Grocery stores have back of house operations and this development occupies the whole block. Add fake windows?
 
Yep, keeps getting sloppier.
I'd pray that those are crappy and inaccurate renders ... but who knows at this point.
I sometimes wonder why building designers don't consult forums such as this more often. Could get essentially free input, feedback, ideas, and critiques. Definitely sounds more sensible than just going forward with whatever HE thinks is right. Half these designers don't even get the vibe of the city. Would be beneficial to consult with those who are going to look at their work on a daily basis.

I guess the good news with the towers not immediately going ahead (if you don't already consider the towers not going ahead to be good news) is that they have some time to reconsider their designs. Maybe we'll end up with something better.
 
You must log in or register to post here.

Back
Top