Agree, that the Inno Tower in terms of architectural style is contrasting drastically with the existing red-bricks, and I still remember during the selection process there was one competiting proposal that blends the new one with the old compus. From my perspective I don’t want the design school to look boring. I’m not a friend of ZH though and some of my classmates think it looks too cyber or some alien structure in a computer game.

Absolutely agree with the point HK populace has little understanding of design. We have no choice but all we can do is to work on it.

I’m looking forward to see the building would make some buzz in the community once it’s built. Hardware drives the software… that’s what’s stemmed from the Hong Kong material culture. It’s better than nothing I guess. What I see is Hong Kong has a long way to learn about design and also a long way to *catch up*. Whatever… everything goes :P

Somehow it is contrast with the old Poly-U, in one way creates dramatic vision of movement of modern architecture, but in the other way ‘sacrifices’ the respected old campus existence…

Anyway, that’s the architecture for, always creates something to be debated, doesn’t it..?

I agree on that ít looks like an object which could be put anywhere. If you look at some of the interior rendering, you could feel like you are going to nowhere, just in a fluid of space. However, I still support to realize the project.

If anyone knows about the campus PolyU, it is not difficult to recognize its very unified, red tile building blocks with horizontal pattern. The kind of solid, super static, old-fashion expression exactly contrasts with Zaha’s proposal. Therefore, no matter which way we should follow, being the opposite, or respecting the exisiting campus, the new building does pose us a question – what does architecture mean to us?