The Fitzroy Street Skyscraper may destroy life on earth as we know it, but there’s no denying there’s a certain beauty to its sky-scraping form as it rises, especially on a clear day:
About This Blog
I am Peter Rukavina and this is my blog. I am a writer, letterpress printer, and a curious person.
To learn more about me, read my /now, look at my bio, listen to audio I’ve posted, read presentations and speeches I’ve written, or get in touch (peter@rukavina.net is the quickest way).
I have been writing here since May 1999: you can explore the 25+ years of blog posts in the archive.
You can subscribe to an RSS feed of posts, an RSS feed of comments, or a podcast RSS feed that just contains audio posts. You can also receive a daily digests of posts by email.
Comments
The irony being that it’s
The irony being that it’s more interesting looking at this stage than it will be when it’s finished. Sort of like the Daniel Libeskind crystal at the ROM. It didn’t go far enough and now sits there looking a bit sad and frumpy.
My sense with the ROM crystal
My sense with the ROM crystal is that the public perception — understandable given the name — was that the end product would be more “crystalline.” For example, be made of glass. The fact that it’s not — and that being inside it feels unusually claustrophobic — is disappointing.
I gather weight and cost were
I gather weight and cost were issues with the exterior cladding. A need to cover everything with fire retardant forced them to box in the steel structural elements. Maybe things have improved, but I was underwhelmed by the expanses of sheetrock and exposed screw heads.
I’m looking forward to seeing the Gehry reworking of the AGO. It’s nice to see a name architect doing something other than a rehash of their signature look.
Ever since you posted your
Ever since you posted your photo of the homBORG blotting out the sun, I’ve been wondering what effect this colossus will have on the solar heating/lighting efficiencies built into the much-ballyhooed Jean Canfield building, especially in winter months. When the environment measures and LEED ratings were calculated, did the possibility of a multi-storey building immediately to the southwest ever enter into consideration? I wonder if there is any way the efficiency losses can be counted. A city with a really forward-thinking planning department (ahem) would take changes like that into account when issuing permits.
Add new comment