stronic wrote:I can't be the only one who dislikes this building. It looks like a claustrophobic box and not in the slim 'New York skyscraper' way.
Get used to it. This building will still be here for many, many more years to come.
However, you do raise a good point about the building which I dislike. Firstly, from what I understand, it was built in the early 1930s (1934 was it?) and in the late 30s it was doubled in width. That's fine, but it did make the building boxier than its Brisbane and Perth (Perth one now demolished) counterparts. However, that's not my main gripe. What I dislike is in the 1980s mutilation of the building. Apart from presumably removing the heritage interior, they merged many of the windows on the building into each other. If you look at the top floors of the building and how they have two parallel windows not attached to each other, that was how all the other windows used to look. I might not have worded that very eloquently, but if you see 1950s/1960s shots of the building, you'll see what I mean. IMO the building looked MUCH better with the double windows.
My point is, would it have been possible for them to have restored these windows back to the way they originally looked, or would that have looked like a tacky "new" addition because they would've used different stone? If it had been possible, I think this would have helped restore this building to its former glory. Just my thoughts,