Comments on: DUO skyscrapers by Buro Ole Scheeren

By: Tom A

Tom A — Sun, 19 May 2013 04:22:00 +0000

The hexagons came from Islamic art and architecture. May have been a requirement by the developer? The developer is 60% owned by the Malaysian government.

By: moss on rock

moss on rock — Wed, 21 Nov 2012 06:15:00 +0000

The internal planning is not considered. The architect does not care about it.

By: chris

chris — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:14:00 +0000

The project makes a clear and concise statement. Regardless of that concept’s validity, that is more than I can say for plenty of high-profile projects getting published these days.

You can quibble with the statement itself, but what good does that do (especially considering the highly plausible fact that none of the commentary is coming from anyone who has built anything significant)?

Arguing the arbitrary nature of the circles is pointless as well; the circles themselves aren’t manifested in any way on the site, so how would they gain significance by being aligned to these so-called un-arbitrary points?

The circles were placed, with reason or not, and the result is a super-simple form that will hopefully create some unique urban spaces (no way to say for sure until it gets built). Personally, I don’t understand the honeycomb tie-in with respect to the overall concept, but at least it provides some visual complexity to the otherwise super-simple towers.

By: moss on rock

moss on rock — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 19:03:00 +0000

Yes, the buildings themselves are, in fact, a non-entity by virtue of the fact that they are a product of the surrounding context. Context in this case meaning distance through the use of obtuse circles. Conceptually the context argument is very poor. Being a “generic city” its context is not defined by existing buildings but other mechanisms.

Ironically the focus is on the plan, but the office floor plates, the units and the retail spaces are not considered and integrated at all. The towers themselves look like the product of an incestuous relationship.

I think the porosity of the landscape through the lower levels has some currency, but there are a number of examples of this that already exist in Singapore. The hexagonal facade is used to homogenize the vertical pockets (Poche) not as sun shading or any useful application.

By: pgdk

pgdk — Tue, 20 Nov 2012 05:35:00 +0000

I think it’s a mistake to assume that they are trying to make the towers fit in. It seems like the idea is only to create a series of interesting urban spaces. Would you really want another building to fit in with the generic context anyway? At the end of the day if you create an interesting space in the city, that is what people will remember about a building, much less than things like finicky facade treatments.