Quote:
Originally Posted by craeg
I read through the jury recommendations and they dont really clear much up for me.
Specifically why do they frame the discussion on the pelli tower differently than either the Rogers or SOM? With Rogers and SOM they talk about the jury's likes and dislikes. With Pelli, they talk about the same with the addition of how the likes can be fixed via "future design"
It's all bunk - Pelli has it in the bag.
|
I thought they did address that discrepancy, specifically with the structural design of the SOM tower being bound up in its height, and how the proposed future resolution of the problems associated with the open-air bus loading area of Rogers' terminal was "not convincing." SOM's terminal was essentially doomed from the get-go it seemed when they decided to stack the bus depot over two levels. Over and over again that came up as a primary issue. Also, the fact that the proposed park had no sources of funding behind its operation or development essentially made the arguments for shortening the terminal null.