As this project sits poised to take its place as a street-deadening background building, I wonder if we would have preferred this.
As this project sits poised to take its place as a street-deadening background building, I wonder if we would have preferred this.
Not sure why that building would be less street-deadening. It's a beautiful rendering though. Also, why would any residential building with ground floor retail be street deadening compared to the parking lot that was there before?As this project sits poised to take its place as a street-deadening background building, I wonder if we would have preferred this.
The rendering itself, not the building.Beautiful? Are we looking at the same rendering? Welcome to Downtown Crossing, the coldest place you have ever been.
I have my issues with the current iteration but it's waaaay better than that glass turd.
As this project sits poised to take its place as a street-deadening background building, I wonder if we would have preferred this.
Welcome to Downtown Crossing, the coldest place you have ever been.
Pretty much everyone is agreed that the ideal solution for this lot would have been 4 discrete (but connected) buildings each emphasizing their vertical rather than horizontal, right?
I'd have preferred a "U" shaped building with the open end of the "U" actually facing the Paramount, the legs of the "U" at 6 stories stepping up to a high rise component at the bottom of the "U", and a courtyard/open area within the "U" for events, premieres, cafes, whatever. But I'm probably imagining Hollywood of the 30's.