Certainly a handsome pair being lost here:
Inviolable? I don't know. But I'm disappointed there's no attempt by HP to at least work with these facades, particularly CCE as the current HP design already contemplates enveloping a building of the same dimensions as CCE.
The height is all about not adding shadow to St. James Cathedral and park.
Oh… and I'm going with the previous version looked ungainly. Sure it's purely rectilinear now which can be dismissed as boring, but it should be a clean design here: this building should complement and be referential to Commerce Court West, and the new design is. It also backs away slightly from Commerce Court North, and its design no longer competes for attention with the carved heads of CCN's ornate top. CC3 is more reserved and respectful now, and that's a good thing in this context. All good in my books.
Looks the pile-on-the-gimmicks crowd is feeling stung. I'm in the if-there's-going-to-be-a-gimmick-make-it-just-one-gimmick-and-do-it-with-some-taste crowd. The previous version simply looked undisciplined, bloated, and screaming for attention that it didn't deserve. If it had actually looked good, I might be down too, but AFAIC we have dodged a bullet.So because an architect from 50 years ago designed a plain and drab building, all future buildings near it must be plain and drab too? What kind of planning rationale is that?