Oslo 360 Hotel

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y136/cityw/Skyscrapercity/BETWEENBAR_3pix.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y136/cityw/Skyscrapercity/BETWEENBAR_3pix.jpg

FACTS | Height: 124m | Floors: 33 | Area: 27 000m2 | Rooms: 600 | Architect: Space Group (http://www.spacegroup.no/) | Developer: Hav Eiendom (http://www.haveiendom.no/)

The hotel and conference facility is the tour de force, a new lighthouse, marking the development area, extended to host cruise ships in the near
future. The hotel twists and stretches to take advantage of the fascinating site location: park and islands at the base, and 360 degree views
above. Arranged in a single layer around a spectacular central atrium, all rooms have amazing views to the fjord and city. At the west, the hotel
steps down with terraced rooms and meets the sea with an amphitheater and park.

The geometry of this 33 storey triangle based tower is motivated by the perception of accelerated perspectives, assuring a constant elegance
from every viewpoint in the city.

LINKS | Space Group (http://www.spacegroup.no/projects/filipstad_hotel_and_ferry_terminal/more) | Casefile (http://web102881.pbe.oslo.kommune.no/saksinnsyn/casedet.asp?mode=all&caseno=201013466) | Preliminary proposal (http://web102881.pbe.oslo.kommune.no/saksinnsyn/showfile.asp?fileid=3069198) | Aftenposten (http://oslopuls.aftenposten.no/byliv/article524983.ece)

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y136/cityw/Skyscrapercity/BETWEENBAR_3pix.jpg

http://i4.photobucket.com/albums/y136/cityw/Skyscrapercity/BETWEENBAR_3pix.jpg

View the renderings in high resolution (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?p=80710034#post80710034)

http://img824.imageshack.us/img824/3677/hjortneshotel1x1000.jpg
Illustration by Luxigon (http://luxigon.fr/)

http://img807.imageshack.us/img807/4990/hjortneshotel2x1000.jpg
Illustration by Luxigon (http://luxigon.fr/)

http://img221.imageshack.us/img221/288/hjortneshotel5x1000ia.jpg
Illustration by Space Group (http://www.spacegroup.no/)

http://img34.imageshack.us/img34/5824/hjortneshotel6x1000.jpg
Illustration by Space Group (http://www.spacegroup.no/)

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/8240/hjortneshotel3x1000.jpg
Illustration by Space Group (http://www.spacegroup.no/)

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/Fil1.png

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/Fil3.png

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/Fil4.png

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/Fil5.png

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/fil7.png

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/fil8.png

Updated by Þróndeimr.

Not bad! :) Probably gonna put a couple of Frogner nimbys down with a heart attack. 130-20% = 107. Not bad at all.

Not a huge fan of the design, the triangle footprint makes it fat from all directions and no setbacks + flat roof is not a good combination for a stand-alone tower. Like Malmös Turning Torso, Århus Lighthouse and Copenhagen Marmormolen we need to make the design exceptional if we are to get public opinion on "our" side.

... Added some of the illustrations for the first post.

We should have just bought this design from Beijing.
http://static.worldarchitecturenews.com/news_images/15735_1_TFP%20Farrells%20Z15%20day.jpg

:cheers:

I can see the points being made here. I'll say, though, that Krystallklar has taught me to not get my hopes even if the first renders we see are great. But still, I don't think it's bad. I much prefer something slightly fat from all angles over something very fat from some.

So, what is the real hight on this proposal? The article says 130, the drawing says 126 and the thread 124.

I don't understand why Spacegroup has only suggested a glass box (triangle) for this plot. If they were to create any enthusiasm about the project among the people, they should've gone for spectacular and instantly recognisable. Now it seems they've just put something together that they have absolutely no faith in.

If we were to have an almost 130 meter high building here, I suggest going international on architects. Not enough experience in these heights here in Norway, it seems..

So, what is the real hight on this proposal? The article says 130, the drawing says 126 and the thread 124.

126 meter is cote height(above sea-level). 124 meter is above the ground.

I have no idea why Spacegroup would make such a boring design here, when they made such a nice one for Oslo S.

Could it be that they don't really believe in the proposal themself? Perhaps they have more exiting 80m highrises as the real proposal, and this is meant to frighten the nimbys into accepting a lower building? It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

Either way I would prefer if we had tried to make Vaterland into Oslos answer to La Défense. Random highrise proposals like this will probably make it easier for the nimbys to accept that we "ruin" just one area.
:)

Could it be that they don't really believe in the proposal themself? Perhaps they have more exiting 80m highrises as the real proposal, and this is meant to frighten the nimbys into accepting a lower building? It's a conspiracy I tell ya!

Either way I would prefer if we had tried to make Vaterland into Oslos answer to La Défense. Random highrise proposals like this will probably make it easier for the nimbys to accept that we "ruin" just one area.
:)

I would guess this is more of a volume study than a completed design proposal, but you definitely might be on to something. BTW - does this proposal mean that the Buchardt/Snøhetta project is dead? The architecture seemed more interesting in that project, but I like the height ambition in this one, obviously. I do think that the plot is fitting for a highrise, but generally I would like to see the tallest buildings collected around the central station until we get a decent skyline and improved density in that area. Anyways; after a lengthy process and lots of hard work, I foresee an objection from Holme, claiming that the sightline to the fortress from a certain point on E18 would be obstructed, and that he would develop anxieties having to look at this anti-human structure while driving to work.

But isn't it a little weird to go official with norways highest building and also placed in a controversial area, and then only offer a volume study to make the decision on? I believe the Snøhetta project was only a vision, and thank for that imho.
:)

Filipstad should be seen as the area with huge potential that it actually is. It's a fairly big plot/area, and should have some much better possibilities than any suggestions I've seen so far.

How about actually putting something remarkable, something that can be an attraction there? Not just "yet another area with buildings like the rest of the city," sort of.
(Well of course buildings are needed, but what I mean is some form of attraction, like say a theme park, or whatever)

No like I said, no propositions I've seen this far treats the area with the respect it deserves (as an area with huge possibilities, almost an "indrefilet").

I think it is quite clear that this is more than just a volume study or anything. The detailed plan and the renders reveals this. The design is very good imo, maybe a little fat, but that is a minor detail. I prefer this design before most of the Disney buildings we see in other parts of the world.

We did see the "old Krystallklar" design by Mad reach this stage of planning aswell before the limited architects competition was launched.

How about actually putting something remarkable, something that can be an attraction there? Not just "yet another area with buildings like the rest of the city," sort of.
(Well of course buildings are needed, but what I mean is some form of attraction, like say a theme park, or whatever)



Remember there still is a chance that an aquarium will be located here, and you just have to cross the bridge to Tjuvholmen for a small theme park. I'm not sure what kind of theme park you had in mind, but at least this could be something.

I think we should fill the place with skyscrapers to fill the municipality pockets with cash and use the money to build a theme-park at a location that needs a boost. Groruddalen, Huken quarry perhaps?

What kind of theme park? We already have Tusenfryd.

^^"Disney World Resort Grorud"


Sort of have a ring to it!:lol:

I read that Oslo byes vel will fight with everything thay have against this highrise. They used the same old arguments that Oslo is a low built city, and a highrise will be a "fremmedelement" in the cityscape. :puke:

Obv only want's highrises in Grünerløkka it seems.

I actually hope this East VS. West catches on. We have two "skyscrapers" here in the east + barcode and maybe 5 new towers around Oslo S. Now it's your turn! :lol:

I read that Oslo byes vel will fight with everything thay have against this highrise. They used the same old arguments that Oslo is a low built city, and a highrise will be a "fremmedelement" in the cityscape. :puke:

Thank god they didn't exist in the 1890's. Then we would never have gotten any of our "forretningspalass", as Oslo was a low built city with two and three floorers.
:ohno:

Actually they are celebrating their 200-year anniversary this year. But in the past they were appaerantly the opposite from what they are today...

^^Oh, I see it now. I thought marshol was talking about Byens Fornyelse, but it was Oslo Byens Vel he mentioned. I think they used to be very pro future in the past, and real architects used to write in their magazine St Hallvard. I think both Lars Backer and Arstein Arneberg defended their highrise visions there. They also wanted to demolish Grunerløkka like I've shown you.
:)

Snakket om fremmedelementer i byen har fått meg engasjert. Jeg har derfor lagd en mal jeg synes vi kan bruke for fremtidig utbygning. Planens mål er tilbakeføre området til slik det så ut før år 900, eller altså få en "historisk skyline". Alle bygninger innenfor det røde området på kartet skal rives:
http://i297.photobucket.com/albums/mm202/joopi_bucket/OsloC.jpg

Utenfor dette området igjen skal det legges til utbygning med arkitektur som "skåner omgivelsene", "henter inspirasjon fra fortiden" og "legger opp til en bærekraftig byutvkling". Dette er et eksempel på slik arkitektur:
http://www.tenchford.com/_images/Hobbitvisit.jpg

Med en slik byplan kan vi hindre at høyhus som Oslo Domkirke, Rådhuset, Karl Johans Gate 45, Akershus Festning og lignende får fortsette å ødelegge den flotte historiske "skylinen" Oslo en gang hadde. Vi sier dermed NEI til slike fremmedelementer!

I read that Oslo byes vel will fight with everything thay have against this highrise. They used the same old arguments that Oslo is a low built city, and a highrise will be a "fremmedelement" in the cityscape. :puke:

Sounds like architectural racism to me :ohno:

I say YES TO MORE HIGHRISES, NO TO ARCHITECTURAL RACISM!!! :cheers:

^^ It's obvisouly that it is the modern architecture they are against. Most of their arguments could be used against all new developments as well as the old buildings that already stands there. "Fremmedlegme" could describe anything human-made, just like the fortress or the museums on the other side of the bay. If you go to Byens Fornyelses own site you will see that they have nothing against modern architecture as longs as it looks like a cheap copy of the old building next door. I suspect Oslo byes vel have similar opinions.

The problem is of course that they have as much right as us to take part in the city planing, despite how stupid you may think their opinions are. They make up a very serious treat for any highrise developments. Especially as they can get the people who live behind the proposal on easily on their time - no one are going to let their view be taken away from them without a fight.

As I said on the previous page, I would prefer if we had tried to make Vaterland into Oslo Skyline and a place for highrise developments. It's also the only place I can realistically see any highrise proposal besides thin towers like Logo Tower be accepted. We could hopefully start to use Kvadraturen as more proper old town too if the new office-developments had started to move to Vaterland/Bjørvika. There are some fantastics buildings there that are sadly forgotten today (Telegrafbygningen anyone?).

Yes, lets start blaming the NIMBY's for being racists and thus force them into accepting tall and modern architecture.

http://www.tenchford.com/_images/Hobbitvisit.jpg


Se der ja, det er hva man kan kalle bærekraftig byplanlegging. Det er også et godt eksempel på miljøvennlig stedsutvikling og grønn urbanisering.

Flott blå-grønn struktur må jeg også si.

It just strook me what an awesomely big home Frodo has (even when compared to Gandalv and counting only the windows).

Did you guys see the TV2 news today?

Did you guys see the TV2 news today?

Here is a link to the story on TV2:
TV2-innslag om Hjortnes Hotel (http://www.tv2.no/play/nyheter/innenriks?progId=509628)

They have found quite a few NIMBYS to interview, but good to see some that were positive as well...

Also, if the Havnevesenet had started on 200m as they said in the interview the area could handle, they would perhaps have managed to get a 130m building...

"Fint som det er nå"?!?!

Welcome to the forum Blurghh! I think we generally should be better at proposing ridiculous height in order to get some real skyscrapers approved.

"Fint som det er nå"?!?!

og "litt for høyt, skal helst ikke være mer enn 4-5 etasjer"

Those old nimbys will be 100 y.o. when the building is completed anyway :goodbye:

I am optimistic about this highrise. To sum up the reactions so far it seems to me that many are postive, but that the project should be something more important than a hotel. Now Havnevesenet have to reply to this challenge.


I don't see how an hotel and a congress center is not important to a city though. If this is how politicians are thinking in Oslo, it is suddenly easier to understand the difficulties Oslo Plaza have met with their expanding plans. That some politicians can play this card does not surprise me, but that the "urbanist" Erling Fossen also use this argument surprises me. Maybe time for Erling Fossen to loose his title. Is he getting old?

It would be interesting to know more about how they're thinking, and what if anything, could be important enough. Personally I prefer of esthetical reasons highrises to be either hotel or private apartments. This secure that the building is lighten up in the evening. We already see some of the Barcode's that are dark after normal working hours. :ohno:

That some politicians can play this card does not surprise me, but that the "urbanist" Erling Fossen also use this argument surprises me. Maybe time for Erling Fossen to loose his title. Is he getting old?

As a urbanist, he does of cource want it to be a vibrant place for ordinary people too. A hotel (only) wont make the place especially interesting for other than the actuall guests. Why not include the aquarium in the base part of the complex.. Make it slimmer and taller and include a public restaurant at top, and people will be much more positive, except the nimbys of cource...

Could it be that he mean the design isn't important enough to approve? If so then I agree with him. It's neither thin enough to offer the tower feeling or have a exiting enough design. It's ok, but nothing more imho.

I have to excuse myself and say sorry to Erling Fossen for putting wrong words in his mouth. He does not play the "Not important enough" card, but he would like a more creative proposal than a hotel.

Still, I would like to hear some alternatives from Mr Fossen. As long his criticism stand alone, people could get the feeling that the urbanist is against highrises.. That does not help our cause.

They should put a new Munch museum on top of the hotel to make it 200 meters :)

Larger renderings from Spacegroup:

http://spacegroup.no/uploads/images/1700017/1302166946/110_perspective3.jpg

http://spacegroup.no/uploads/images/1700017/1302081135/Hjortnes%20persp1%20kred.%20Space%20Group%20-%20Luxigon%2020110322.jpg

Why ohhhh why cant we norwegians ever make a signature building sleek and elegant???????? It never ends with a pointy or sculptural tip. I would definitely go for a more sleek and pointier design both here and on Klp right behind Posthuset (gamle brevsentralen.

We definitely need more design in our buildings here in Norway, and especially tall buildings. Radisson blu next to slottsplassen, posthuset, this design (even though a little bit better i must admit) and every single other tall high rise we have are square and just a little bit boring.

why dont we at least try?

That's what we get when we decide that everything low= good architecture while everything high = greedy developmenters trying to ruin the city.

Project is moving forward:

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3601.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3602.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3603.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3604.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3605.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3606.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3607.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3608.jpg

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3609.jpg

http://web102881.pbe.oslo.kommune.no/saksinnsyn/showfile.asp?fileid=3308337

I hope it don't get approved. That does not look good. :ohno:

Ofcourse it will not get approved...

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3609.jpg

http://web102881.pbe.oslo.kommune.no/saksinnsyn/showfile.asp?fileid=3308337

Oh, there I see it. The disproportion between this Highrise and the Fram museum. Scandalous!

http://i123.photobucket.com/albums/o309/IceCheese/Hjortneshotell.jpg:


Utvikling av terminalen tar utgangspunkt i eksisterende terminalbygg. De kjørbare arealene komprimeres til 3 etasjer for håndtering av gods og passasjerer. Hjortnesbuen rundt terminalen blir synlig fra mange vinkler. Det forutsettes derfor stilt store krav til utforming av denne bebyggelsen, spesielt gjelder dette det høyere hotellbygget

Let us hope so!:cheers:

Great! I'm a big fan of the simplicity of the structure, no fancy bs there. Since nothing is decided yet, I guess there is "hope in a hanging snore"..

The simple structure is because the model is without a facade design yet. A nice design is crucial for this building. I hope it will be slimmer too.

^^ It's actually not the design I'm worried about, but the shape and the low height to width ratio. If we should build a highrise on such a prominent plot where there aren't any highrises from before to "support it", then it needs to be as close to perfect as possible.

^^ It's actually not the design I'm worried about, but the shape and the low height to width ratio. If we should build a highrise on such a prominent plot where there aren't any highrises from before to "support it", then it needs to be as close to perfect as possible.

If you want to build a office/hotel highrise of 124m and about you need it to be quite wide to fit enough area in it to make it cost-friendly. If you want to build a slim office building, increase it in height. There are of course ways to design it so that it looks slim from several angels but still having the area the developer want to have.

About the discussion on design and shape, its way to early to even think about it. A competition will be arranged (if this project ever reach that far), where the specific teams will design facades and shapes of their own vision.

So if they are ever going to build a landmark tower on Filipstad it needs to be tall (200m if not taller), slim and of great architecture, meaning get some architect firm who know how to do great tall architecture. And it will cost a bit of money.

^^ I agree entirely, which is why I am against this building as I don't think it can do the plot justice not matter how good the design get as it simply too low, too fat or both.

So you are against a possible highrise (skyscraper by norwegian standard) because you assume it won't look good enough? I think we should be quite content if it turns out to not be a square box.

^^ No, it won't look good enough unless they change the shape. Not any assuming there.

Project is moving forward:

http://i1126.photobucket.com/albums/l608/ingenioren4/3604.jpg


boring.jpg

I mean, it's tall, which is good, but if you look at all the amazing stuff being built around the world (i.e China), you'd think they'd be able to come up with something better than this. :ohno:

Unless it's just a volumstudie, in which case it's still pretty lacking in vision.

Of course it is possible to build a fantastic looking highrise on this plot without making it taller. The question is of course if someone is willing to pay for it, and the city bold enough to approve it.

And what does "good enough" mean anyway?

^^ Good enough = So good looking that we should allow it to be built on such a prominent place. The proportions of the proposal are all wrong making it look fat and low. It's not possible to design that away.

We know nothing about what the regulations will allow for, so I would hold back my judgment. And I simply can't agree that it is impossible to design something nice with the shown volume either.

Venstre and KrF is in the byråd now. I'll believe this when I see it.

It's still the bystyre that has the final judgement in these cases, and Bård Folke Fredriksen (H) will stay as the man in charge for PBE and other departments working on city developement. I hope it will mostly stay as today, and I hope the opinion will turn more and more positive to taller buildings.

Soon they have no choice but too turn more positive to highrises, with the population growth, prices of apartments, the eager to keep all the green spots and marka.

^^ Good enough = So good looking that we should allow it to be built on such a prominent place. The proportions of the proposal are all wrong making it look fat and low. It's not possible to design that away.

You always seem to forget that there are different opinions about esthetics, or what makes a building good looking. I for one thinks this building is very promising and has a sublime quality to it. It is not fat at all imo, it is much slimmer than both Plaza and Radisson SAS. The design will probably not change much either. You better get used to this highrise, because it will be buildt :)

You always seem to forget that there are different opinions about esthetics, or what makes a building good looking.
Not at all. If you follow the discussion then you will see that I just answered kjetilab on why I was against this project. If you feel different then great ...

I for one thinks this building is very promising and has a sublime quality to it. It is not fat at all imo, it is much slimmer than both Plaza and Radisson SAS.

I think both Plaza and Postgiro are too fat, but at least they are placed together which makes whatever shortcomings they have less apparent.


The design will probably not change much either. You better get used to this highrise, because it will be buildt :)
I somehow doubt that with Riksantikvaren in town. Not in its current form at least.

I can see why there are mixed feelings about this building. I am kind of tired of the fact that the only way we are able to get a highrise approved is if it has a really "curved/creative" design, but if we are going to go for "design" we may as well go for something more visionary and innovative. Maybe something like the Marina Bay in Singapore :)
http://images.travelpod.com/tripwow/photos/ta-00bd-736c-b614/marina-bay-sands-n1-singapore-singapore+1152_12915173191-tpfil02aw-10129.jpg

Krangler om skyskraper på Filipstad
http://www.tu.no/bygg/article293851.ece

Mens Bernt Stilluf Karlsen i Oslo Havn KF vil ha et 130 meter høyt konferansehotell på Filipstad, mener arkitekt Niels A. Torp at hele området bør legges i møllpose.

Bernt Stilluf Karlsen and company needs to fucking learn! Why do they keep releasing such turd-like sketches of new possible projects and thereby give the NIMBY's such an easy task?! They can play the Lambda card whenever they want now, the quality and vision of new developments needs to be top notch! Relealse something that actually looks like it's been given some serious thought, not something a kindergarden could come up with!

I'll just take this in norwegian.

Det er vel kanskje på tide å legge Niels Torp i møllposen? Han har stått bak mye bra på Aker Brygge og Tjuvholmen, og er vel Norges fremste postmoderne arkitekt, men fobien hans mot "høyhus" i Oslo er håpløst irrasjonell og hører ikke hjemme i offentligheten. Han har forsåvidt nok å svare for hva Bjørvika angår, ettersom han står bak det avgjort styggest og minst menneskevennlige bygget som står der i dag; Oslo Atrium.

Bernt Stilluf Karlsen and company needs to fucking learn! Why do they keep releasing such turd-like sketches of new possible projects and thereby give the NIMBY's such an easy task?! They can play the Lambda card whenever they want now, the quality and vision of new developments needs to be top notch! Relealse something that actually looks like it's been given some serious thought, not something a kindergarden could come up with!

I don't agree. Their vision is sublime imo.