http://img524.imageshack.us/img524/5400/dsc01500in5.jpg




http://img129.imageshack.us/img129/1939/dsc01504dd6.jpg




http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/8225/dsc01501vz6.jpg

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/8225/dsc01501vz6.jpg

Wow, look at those un-aligned windows, how modern, innovative, funky! :okay:

:puke:

Scale wise I don't mind it. I wouldn't think too badly of the design either if it didn't have wacky-windows.

Wow, look at those un-aligned windows, how modern, innovative, funky! :okay:

:puke:

Scale wise I don't mind it. I wouldn't think too badly of the design either if it didn't have wacky-windows.

Ha! Hadn't even notticed that - what a waste of time! :nuts:

Other than that I don't mind this building too much either. I think it was felt as a great loss at the time as it's a prime site on the waterfront, but given the number of tall buildings proposed for the area now and in the future I think this will fit quite well into that spectrum. I'm also becoming more and more convinced that large planes of reflective glass look great on a waterfront, especially when they have the sun on them!

I don't mind it also, except for the stupid un-aligned windows...:dunno:

I like the scale of it next to Waterloo, it gives the impression of a large warehouse, which is probably what they were aiming for, but a nice tower wouldn't have gone amis at the City Lofts end.

You know I've typed a reply to this thread about four times now, and deleted it again before posting it. I just can't find a redeeming feature about this development. I can't even say it's better than nothing because if City Lofts hadn't built there someone else would have. Like Jux, I think a mid-rise tower towards the Princes Dock entrance, with a lower level section towards the existing warehouse would've worked - think King Eddie's but smaller. I just don't like it. :(

A shot this afternoon of City Loft's 2, between Waterloo and City Lofts 1.

http://img256.imageshack.us/img256/6316/zcityloftstwo451no1.jpg

http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/8225/dsc01501vz6.jpg



Looks like student accomodation...:ohno:

wouls be good if it was all the centre cladding, and no red brick

wouls be good if it was all the centre cladding, and no red brick

I agree Westi. Although I still don't think it's totally beyond redemption. Like a lot of renders I think it's going to look quite impressive in the 'flesh'. And don't forget, this would be a massive development if it was built anywhere else in the city - so it's not as small as it seems, it's all relative.

Also it does plug a distinctive 'gap' on the waterfront view, and once we've got the King Eddies and Shanghai towers looming above it I think it'll add to the overall density of the docks. Put cynically, if they were going to build a low grade, boring building I'm glad they built something that will blend into the rest of the environment, rather than another mid rise tower.

[http://img208.imageshack.us/img208/8225/dsc01501vz6.jpg

Mildly horrid, but not as horrid as the original render implied. It'll just be invisible filling in the urban scene, not inappropriate enough to stand out in the way the Wendy House does, and not good enough to stand out either.

wouls be good if it was all the centre cladding, and no red brick


Yuk

Mildly horrid, but not as horrid as the original render implied. It'll just be invisible filling in the urban scene, not inappropriate enough to stand out in the way the Wendy House does, and not good enough to stand out either.

Exactly. In years to come we might look back and think 'what a waste' - but given the planning climate at the time it was proposed I think we actually got away quite lightly, we could have ended up with something really nasty which we lived to regret. As Poli says, this building will simply 'blend' and in this location, in the long run, I don't think that'll be a bad thing. We've got plenty of 'stand-out' buildings in the pipeline, and low-rise, blandish buildings like this can help to 'frame' the sorts of buildings we really want to see rising in this area. So neither a raging success nor a complete disaster, although I am looking forward to seeing a setting sun reflecting off all that glass into the dock...

where is trinity dock?

http://www.citylofts.co.uk/apartments/future.asp

http://www.trinitydock.co.uk/

where is trinity dock?

http://www.citylofts.co.uk/apartments/future.asp

http://www.trinitydock.co.uk/

I think thats the name for the new apartments next to Customs Offices next to Kings Dock arena?

It definitely is. Looks at the logo. It's a representation of the three towers.

trinity road is Bootle like:)

I like this design more than I thought I was going to:
http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/5382/february08027bg8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/499/february08029hn5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/3628/february08031hm8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img207.imageshack.us/img207/7871/february08032zg5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

http://img90.imageshack.us/img90/5068/february08033gx5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


And the original:
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7997/february08030aln2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

City Lofts is a horrible pastiche of styles - student accommodation meets Victorian warehouse.

http://img186.imageshack.us/img186/499/february08029hn5.jpg (http://imageshack.us)
And the original:
http://img122.imageshack.us/img122/7997/february08030aln2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)

The British commerical construction industry no longer has the wherewithall or will to execute high quality window settings involving bricks and masonry. It lacks the skills and it lacks the desire.

Almost without exception, the very worst cost-cutting travesties of modern commericial design in brick buildings centre around their most important visual feature- the windows. They're nearly always properly shit.

City Lofts 2 is, unfortunately, the perfect illustration. A building with a lot of potential- great presence, some quite impressive forms, proper bulk.....then ruined by these council-estate slit windows, cheaply finished, no pediments, no flourishes, no sills to speak of, no carving, no masonry, no proper moulding, no finishing, no effort, no ideas, no thought, no additional expense and no class.

Modern construction should stick to what it can be arsed to do which is generally to attempt to rearrange crude, cheap, mass-produced, synthetic, kids Lego blocks into poorly constructed but semi-liveable "designs." Which is what the first City Lofts does really well and why, to me, it succeeds where CL2 fails.

Compare the how well the windows are realised in CL1 with the skanky rubbish they gave CL2.

If you can't do good work in a certain medium, if that medium is too demanding for your skill base, then don't.

Great shots cenric. :)

I was somewhat undecided when I first saw the plans for CL2. Now seeing it in the flesh so to speak, I'm not sure I like it. Sure, it fits well with the dock warehouse alongside, but like VT rightly states, there is nothing of interest. It is utterly bland and underwhelming. CL1 would never win any awards for architecture, but compared to CL2 it's a masterpiece. I know you can't expect every building to be iconic, and to create a proper streetscape you need some 'filler' buildings. But there a vast spectrum between filler and iconic, and I wish the designers and CL2 had moved a little bit closer to the middle-ground rather than sidle up alongside filler.

That said, one thing I do like about it is it's bulk. It's size makes a statement and continues the trend for larger buildings in that area, and hopefully will make the case for low-level stuff like Costco increasingly untenable in the long-term.

Double Dobley.

Great shots cenric. :)

I was somewhat undecided when I first saw the plans for CL2. Now seeing it in the flesh so to speak, I'm not sure I like it. Sure, it fits well with the dock warehouse alongside, but like VT rightly states, there is nothing of interest. It is utterly bland and underwhelming. CL1 would never win any awards for architecture, but compared to CL2 it's a masterpiece. I know you can't expect every building to be iconic, and to create a proper streetscape you need some 'filler' buildings. But there a vast spectrum between filler and iconic, and I wish the designers and CL2 had moved a little bit closer to the middle-ground rather than sidle up alongside filler.

That said, one thing I do like about it is it's bulk. It's size makes a statement and continues the trend for larger buildings in that area, and hopefully will make the case for low-level stuff like Costco increasingly untenable in the long-term.


The bulk of it's great.
The three external vertical features (the staircases) are good.
The glass, roof-level observation floor is good.

The penitentury slit-windows are catastrophic.

The windows do let it down a bit, but this is a modern building, and probably would not have been clad in brick, but for the nearby warehouse, so the windows would have suited more a non-brick surface. I will give it some time, before deciding if i really like it.

The bulk of it's great.
The three external vertical features (the staircases) are good.
The glass, roof-level observation floor is good.

The penitentury slit-windows are catastrophic.

Totally agree. Only the tired gimmicky windows let this development down.

The rest of it has turned out better than I expected.

The British commerical construction industry no longer has the wherewithall or will to execute high quality window settings involving bricks and masonry. It lacks the skills and it lacks the desire.

Almost without exception, the very worst cost-cutting travesties of modern commericial design in brick buildings centre around their most important visual feature- the windows. They're nearly always properly shit.

City Lofts 2 is, unfortunately, the perfect illustration. A building with a lot of potential- great presence, some quite impressive forms, proper bulk.....then ruined by these council-estate slit windows, cheaply finished, no pediments, no flourishes, no sills to speak of, no carving, no masonry, no proper moulding, no finishing, no effort, no ideas, no thought, no additional expense and no class.

Modern construction should stick to what it can be arsed to do which is generally to attempt to rearrange crude, cheap, mass-produced, synthetic, kids Lego blocks into poorly constructed but semi-liveable "designs." Which is what the first City Lofts does really well and why, to me, it succeeds where CL2 fails.

Compare the how well the windows are realised in CL1 with the skanky rubbish they gave CL2.

If you can't do good work in a certain medium, if that medium is too demanding for your skill base, then don't.
:applause: Bring back proper detailing to windows and doorways in brick buildings. Strip off the detail in the old Georgian, Victorian and Edwardian buildings and whats left ?

It looks better than I thought it would, always a pleasant surprise. The Dock Road wall reinforces the penitentiary aspect and needs to go for the most part (keep the gates).

The bulk of it's great.
The three external vertical features (the staircases) are good.
The glass, roof-level observation floor is good.

The penitentury slit-windows are catastrophic.

Great photos Cenric. I agree with VT - I think the bulk and shape is excellent and really suits the site, I'm quite impressed that they've managed to actually create the physical presence of a warehouse. I also like the external staircases which give some depth and variety to the back of the building, and the roof top is excellent, exactly the kind of feature you'd expect to see if you were redeveloping an old warehouse.

However those windows are needlessly silly. They've got so much right, but then failed to appreciate that one of the over-riding defining features of traditional warehouses is their symmetry. Symmetry helps ballance such bulky buildings and give them a much grander feel. These odd off-kilter windows look like the sort of cheap gimmick you'd find on otherwise bland student accomodation.

It shows a lack of confidence in the actual design of the building and although I don't think it's ruined it completely it's certainly preventing it from becoming a classic modern waterfront building.

The British commerical construction industry no longer has the wherewithall or will to execute high quality window settings involving bricks and masonry. It lacks the skills and it lacks the desire.

Almost without exception, the very worst cost-cutting travesties of modern commericial design in brick buildings centre around their most important visual feature- the windows. They're nearly always properly shit.

City Lofts 2 is, unfortunately, the perfect illustration. A building with a lot of potential- great presence, some quite impressive forms, proper bulk.....then ruined by these council-estate slit windows, cheaply finished, no pediments, no flourishes, no sills to speak of, no carving, no masonry, no proper moulding, no finishing, no effort, no ideas, no thought, no additional expense and no class.

Modern construction should stick to what it can be arsed to do which is generally to attempt to rearrange crude, cheap, mass-produced, synthetic, kids Lego blocks into poorly constructed but semi-liveable "designs." Which is what the first City Lofts does really well and why, to me, it succeeds where CL2 fails.

Compare the how well the windows are realised in CL1 with the skanky rubbish they gave CL2.

If you can't do good work in a certain medium, if that medium is too demanding for your skill base, then don't.

windows are generally getting smaller. Every flat ive had natural light is less of an option.

The building at Waterloo dock is a perfect example of what happens when heritage dictates......

windows are generally getting smaller. Every flat ive had natural light is less of an option.

The building at Waterloo dock is a perfect example of what happens when heritage dictates......

id love to agree with you that heritage makes new builds less inspired, but infact in places without those constrictions there are infact even worse new builds than this one i'l see if i can show you an example.. it all generally comes down to developers greed, minimum investment, maximum return ***edit*** here you go, a development that proves it is greed and not heritage that reduces quality.. a proud edition to its neighbouring canary wharf estate -and no it is neither student nor council/affordable but high priced private http://homepage.mac.com/benveasey/.Pictures/NO12.JPG

id love to agree with you that heritage makes new builds less inspired, but infact in places without those constrictions there are infact even worse new builds than this one i'l see if i can show you an example.. it all generally comes down to developers greed, minimum investment, maximum return ***edit*** here you go, a development that proves it is greed and not heritage that reduces quality.. a proud edition to its neighbouring canary wharf estate -and no it is neither student nor council/affordable but high priced private

Good point.

OMG that is quite something

That is truly a hideous building. Thing is, a smart developer knows that there is significant added value to be achieved from an iconic design. My guess is that this building is a mix of a dumb/greedy developer and an architect that is either useless or wants to make a statement by designing a really brutal building.

anyone know how many storeys this is, is it eight?

That building is absolutely horrific and has no redeeming features whatsoever. There are few buildings as monumentally hideous that I can think of off the top of my head. Possibly the Ryugyong? Hotel in Pyongyang, North Korea but in the democratic world....

Initially I was critical about this development, but now its here I'm not so sure, it does have a sort of industrial look about it which may give it some merit, have to wait until its finished.


http://img218.imageshack.us/img218/7945/cityloftphase215pu2.jpg


http://img228.imageshack.us/img228/6605/cityloftphase216cu4.jpg

Would i be right in assuming the end stair tower and all the front windows are awaiting the silver/blue plastic strips to be ripped off...!

Would i be right in assuming the end stair tower and all the front windows are awaiting the silver/blue plastic strips to be ripped off...!

I liked the stair-towers when I thought they were going to be wood finish.

This gray cladding kills it- at least on photograph.

Sorry to say I still don't like this. It's trying to be both historic and modern at the same time, and not really succeeding at either of them. The irregularly placed windows are all wrong. It would improve the building no end if it had properly placed windows, however the stairwells would still be out of place. I'll stand by my previous comments that I like the mass it adds to the area, but that's about as positive as I can get on this one I'm afraid.

Sorry to say I still don't like this. It's trying to be both historic and modern at the same time, and not really succeeding either of them. The irregularly placed windows are all wrong. It would improve the building no end if it had properly placed windows, however the stairwells would still be out of place. I'll stand by my previous comments that I like the mass it adds to the area, but that's about as positive as I can get on this one I'm afraid.

The windows are criminal. Disaster-zone.

Makes you just pleased the wall's there.

It looks better in real life than it does in 2D. Still nothing special but better than those horrors built on the site of the former West Waterloo warehouse. :bash:

I really don't mind it, I would go as far to say I rather like it.

I quite like it too, in much the same way as I like the King's Dock hotels.

The windows are criminal. Disaster-zone.
.....

Looks like a lot of bathrooms....

I really don't mind it, I would go as far to say I rather like it.

Me too. I hated the renders, but this doesn't look at all bad. The windows work very well. Doug, thanks for posting the pictures.

That is the @ss end of the building too.

Much better at the front elevation facing towards the Mersey I presume?

I don't like this

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3100/2560162738_32575242e6_o.jpg

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3043/2559337937_fa210df615_o.jpg

^^

Not good is it? It looks like a super-sized version of the low level stuff that pollutes the front edge of Princes Dock. This must be the worst that City Lofts has come up with out of all their projects in different cities.

i dont mind it, looks alot like the cinnamon building in ropewalks, though the design might have been far more appropriate for that area than here

I also think it looks better in real life than it does in a photograph. My main objection to this kind of development is that it creates an urban space of marooned blocks that don't connect with each and don't integrate well into the surrounding area (the dock wall doesn't help) and doesn't promote the kind of seamless density of development that IMO is characteristic of a proto-downtown area.

I'd call this an opportunity missed. It's not shockingly bad in any one respect, but the overall effect is somewhat underwhelming given the prime location and the historic grandure of it's setting.

In my opinion they've tried to do too many things, but not achieved any of them very well. There's an obvious reference to the traditional styling and scale of the docks, but then they've tried to add modern twists such as irregular windows which undermine the historic reference, without really achieving the truly modern effect.

The material's too, are neither here nor there. Traditional red brick combined with modern glass and grey cladding, so neither style looks quite right. They should have gone all modern with a trad reference, or vice versa - but this ends up looking more like glorified halls of residence than anything significant.

On the plus side it does add necessary 'bulk' to the area, fills a vacant piece of derelict land and helps to connect the north docks to Princess Docks, gently drawing the residential area further along the river. It should also look good from the river when it's lit up at night, so it's not a complete loss, it's just hard to call it an outright 'win' either.

Its a " present " to appease the heritage police and those wonderful residents ( good evening Lady D :bow: ) next door in the Waterloo building. ALL is sweetness and light until Peel announce the winning design for the Shanghai Tower that is proposed for an artificial island not 100m away from this bland boring block, light the blue touch paper ,stand back and wait for the fireworks.:nuts:

If this building were a stand alone structure or situated in a more urban setting I think it would be ok. As we all know the term 'in-keeping' when used in planning documents is just a load of bullshit to appease the planners, CABE, EH and the heritage mob.

This development was no exception, so how does a block of flats with a river elevation consisting mainly of glass panels and a flat glass paneled roof line sit alongside a red brick Victorian warehouse with a traditionally angled and slated roof, IMO it doesn't. I think City Lofts 2 shows this 'in keeping' malarky in the worse possible light and the lesson here for all concerned should be, don't be afraid to be creative!!


http://img141.imageshack.us/img141/762/p1020262sy5.jpg


I much prefer this one.


http://img88.imageshack.us/img88/6204/p1020260hd1.jpg

Thats pathetic.

I'll never get over the wacky windows, they are truly pathetic.

http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/1852/p1000205dg6.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img291.imageshack.us/img291/4192/p1000208uv3.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img185.imageshack.us/img185/1727/p1000209sp4.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img407.imageshack.us/img407/5332/p1000212nb8.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img49.imageshack.us/img49/453/p1000207dt2.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img205.imageshack.us/img205/721/p1000213wu9.jpg (http://imageshack.us)


http://img165.imageshack.us/img165/221/p1000210gs7.jpg (http://imageshack.us)