Tregunter 3
Hong Kong, China

HEIGHT: 220m/721 feet
FLOORS: 66 floors
COMPLETION: 1993
ARCHITECT: Chung Wah Nan Architects/ Rocco Design Ltd

The lower portion of the tower is in an X shape, which houses one unit in each of its wings. For the upper floors, two wings set back and the sleek main shaft remaining houses the 28 duplexes and a triplex.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/503/103tre.jpg

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/photopost/data/503/103tre2.jpg

http://extranet.emporis.com/files/transfer/6/2002/01/137558.jpg

5/10, not my taste.

Ah the back is just really bad!I can't get any worse then that.
5.0/10

5.5/10

:ohno: very sad building , very :down:

5.5/10

The front is ok, a bit dark but the back is disgusting.

4.5/10

Ugly ugly... :no:

ugly...4/10

The back is really awful!!! 4

5/10 i thought this was looking good, until i saw that back

5.5/10 - the front isn't too bad - there's good contrast between the glass and concrete, and the lighter spandrels help to tie the two parts of the design together. Plus, the "wings" at each side, and the indentations help avoid monotony.

But the roof isn't good at all- various sections of the building simply stop, as if they'd been sliced off, and they aren't tied together at all - it simply looks cheap, careless, and chaotic.

And that back - cheap looking, dull and almost ugly (the only reason I let it get by with "almost" is that it isn't a flat expanse), with rows of windows like holes in a cheese grater - they should have carried the glass around from the front.

6/10 out of pity

4/10. says enough i quess...:?

7

I don't like it, 5/10

5/10 The front is pretty good, but the back is ugly !

6/10

Looks like they run out of glass. ;) 5/10.

hmph..dunno about this one...
7/10 i spose...

This one is not bad at all for a residential!
7.5:guns1:

Has too many aspect of robots, spaceships, factories etc. in it's design.

5/10

8

:)

facade: front is ok back is so bad
form: ok
points: 6

It looks ok, very tall for a residental tower

7/10

Nice facade, i liked its corners...
8/10

5/10
This building looks quite grim and plain. It has no especially nice features; it isn't that ugly, though.

5/10


I don't like it

looks like a building that tried to be concrete-block residential and glass commercial at the same time, and failed miserably.

6

5/10
Is no nice.

6.8/10 ... prob one of the most expensive apartment in hk due to its height and views ... however there are better ones on tregunter path ... it would of been great with all glass ...

the front in awesome but the back is even "better"

6.5/10

4/10

How a nice front can be spoiled completely by an awful back. 5.5

Well the front looks very nice but the back is extremely ugly. If only the building looked like the front all of the way around I would like it a lot more but because of it's back and some of it's side it's a real eye sore for me. 4.5/10

Rather cheap looking and, frankly, rather ugly.

5/10

One side is good, one side is bad. 5.0

4/10

Looks ok from the darker side, but from the back, ugh. 6/10

4.5

Way too messy for me

This is alright for an apartment but most apartments are all very ugly...and this one doesn't sway from the "all apartments" category. 4.5

7/10 nice contrasts

:puke: That's all I ever want to see of this one. I give it less than 3. :tongue:

BLEAK! 4! :sleepy:

Guys this is a residential building, not an office building...

^yes, but the facade is too ugly!

The front is alright!

The back is typical Hong Kong-style ugly. 5/10 for the height and the front end, as well as the expensive location/view.

Too bad the rear is all you see from The Peak.

Not bad for a residential, but generally it deserves only 5/10

Ugh, The back is horrible. 1/10

7/10

5.5/10

5.5.

4/10.

3.5

5/10

Some parts of the building are very ordinary.

5/10

7/10

7/10

4/10

the back looks not that good 6

8/10 i like it.

6/10

6/10

Not so bad for being residential 6.5

4/10 :omg: disgusting rear view

7/10

OK, I think I am lossing my appetite on likeness. Pretty much not.....I still can eat my fasination, but otherwise, with this low class designed apartment (That's what it looks like, don't hate on me.) I feel discouraged. But what can I do? Complain yes. 3/10.

Symbolic of HK in many senses... residential and very tall. It's purpose to to house and it does it quite well. This was the tallest residential building in the world until it was surpassed by the Trump World Tower in New York City.

I dont like it 5/10

Ugh 5/10

5/10

6.5/10.

Facing the water- 8.5 the back gets a 3. Average and score 5.5

http://static.flickr.com/36/85944613_9598b8ef54_b.jpg

5.5/10

5/10

5/10

5/10

7.5/10

5,5/10

7/10

6/10

the pix dont do it justice!!!!
it looks way more impressive in real life as it is the 3rd tallest apartment in the world

not really bad i think 7.5/10

5/10

7/10

6.5/10 not my taste

5/10

6. ugly!

7/10

3 / 10

a "design" that can be done in minutes.

6.5

only 5,5/10 :(

6/10

7/10.

tall but ugly.

5/10

4.5/10

7/10

6/10

6.5/10

5/10 I think I'm being generous

4/10

7/10

5/10

4/10

4/10.

3/10

6/10

Ah... the back is 1/10, the front is 7/10, so how should I rate this??
I'll be nice and give it a 4.5, as I think it's not too bad for a condo, but I really wouldn't like to have had a sea view and see this thing being built in front of it.
4.5/10

5.5

5.

6/10

6.5/10

3/10

4.5/10

6/10

4/

4/10

7/10

7/10
:redx:

6,5/10

7/10

5.0/10

had potential to be nice
5/10

7. Regards.

7.5/10

7/10

Poor design. 5

7.5

voted 5.5/10

From http://www.emporis.com

http://www.emporis.com/img/6/2002/10/162234.jpg

http://www.emporis.com/img/6/2002/01/137558.jpg

7.5/10

ordinary-looking.
7/10

6.5/10

looks a bit cheap

7/10

9/10

Ugly, ordinary residential building. 2.5/10

5/10 seen worse seen better

4/10

6/10

7/10

6/10

8/10

4/10

Ugly. Tallness points, but ugly.

4.5/10

6/10 Poor finish. The design on itself is good. :)

6.5/10

5/10

7/10

Edit.

5/10

5/10