Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Give Hall D a chance

Collapse
X
 
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #91
    I have to agree with many of you about this project/potential monstrosity.

    Firstly, the building doesn't fit its context from any side. On the river valley side, the building does not even attempt to complement the existing building. It looks like a giant glass wedge driven into the side of an otherwise beautiful building. Hall D also does not compliment the river valley. While the original building had a very organic look to it with its "waterfall" design, the new building is boxy and shiney and hostile to the natural valley. On the Jasper Avenue side, the building is cold and imposing with its grey blocks. From above it looks like the roof of a warehouse covered in snow (and in a few years will look like a warehouse covered in dirt and bird droppings).

    However, the damage is done. It is now time to make the best of what's been built.

    It scares me that the same people are getting contracts to design key buildings in the city. Has anyone seen the National Institute of Nanotechnology? You would think that a place with a name as cool as that would be more than a big rectangular box made of brick, glass and some corrugated metal that looks like I used to be the walls of a farmer's shed. The expansion to the Space & Science Centre is quite similar to Hall D: it is functional and nice inside, but out of context. I hope the future is better for the Museum.

    Edmonton, though it aspires to be a world-class city, is destined to be adequate and nothing more unless the powers that be and developers alike can shake off their farmer mentalities. We value function over form, which is good, but we value it to such an extent that we are willing to completely sacrifice form to achieve funtion. We're willing to build warehouses for our artifacts and driveways for our squares, and though they may be functional, they will never be memorable.

    There is so much potential in this city and so much money, but I fear that we will end up with a legacy of adequacy unless we take a look at what we are doing and contemplate what we need to do to go beyond adequate.

    Comment


    • #92
      If the newspapers had any guts, they could do a photo montage that posed the following question:

      NINT + Hall D + Science Centre Addition = Royal Alberta Museum ?????

      If you know what I mean from a page layout standpoint...
      [email protected][email protected]: the 5th Horseman of the Apocalypse

      Comment


      • #93
        Has anyone seen the National Institute of Nanotechnology? You would think that a place with a name as cool as that would be more than a big rectangular box made of brick, glass and some corrugated metal that looks like I used to be the walls of a farmer's shed. The expansion to the Space & Science Centre is quite similar to Hall D: it is functional and nice inside, but out of context. I hope the future is better for the Museum.
        NINT is aweful. A lot of us say too many buildings in Edmonton are three sided. Nint on the other hand only has one side that is marginally acceptable. The most upseting is the massive 13 foot wall of tile at ground level. It makes for a pretty depressing daily walk from Windsor to the ETLC.

        Comment


        • #94
          Originally posted by Qassim
          Edmonton, though it aspires to be a world-class city, is destined to be adequate and nothing more unless the powers that be and developers alike can shake off their farmer mentalities. We value function over form, which is good, but we value it to such an extent that we are willing to completely sacrifice form to achieve funtion. We're willing to build warehouses for our artifacts and driveways for our squares, and though they may be functional, they will never be memorable.

          There is so much potential in this city and so much money, but I fear that we will end up with a legacy of adequacy unless we take a look at what we are doing and contemplate what we need to do to go beyond adequate.
          You just nailed it dude! our architects and planners need to be place makers function facilitators..

          Comment

          Working...
          X