I'm really liking this revised proposal. A warning that the following is extremely subjective, perhaps to excess, but here goes.
I never hated the original design. To me, it seemed to have this hyper-masculinity about it that was incredibly alluring. I saw some echoes of the Futurist Manifesto in it - tearing down the old for the sake of the new, relentlessly male, phallic, a departure from the tired convention of the refined box so trumpeted by the establishment critics. There was little regard for context, which, I must admit, can be appealing at times if executed properly. Had it been proposed on another site with less baggage - this is, after all, a fairly functional urban stretch - I would have been a more vocal supporter. The proposed loss of the POW was too much for me.
It's much easier for me to get behind this new proposal. I'm quite pleased that the POW is to be saved and that the area's existing urban bones are to be respected. I don't think we've seen the project's masculinity diminished either - though the flashy six-pack abs are traded in for a more sophisticated, say, collection of fine whisky. It's a more mature proposal for a more mature neighbourhood in a mature city, and that's to be lauded. It's still an extravagant proposal by any stretch - its height and heft unprecedented in the recent history of the city (or country, for that matter). I'm looking forward to seeing it further evolve.
Just as an aside, and I hesitate to bring this up, but the personal attacks on Keesmaat in this thread and elsewhere on the forum are starting to turn me off in a big way. I wonder if there isn't some lingering misogyny motivating some of the, well, viciousness of the attacks. She seems to be doing her job fairly capably, if not in a way immune to criticism (which no public servant should be above). But for the life of me, I can't recall any male bureaucrat provoking such scorn for so little scandal.