The Groningen Thread

[TheReconstructer]

This thread is about the reconstruction of the Grote Markt (Grand Market) in Groningen. This place was bombed by Germans at the end of World War II.
It included many historical buildings which where important for the history of Groningen, like the Scholtenshuis, the Goudwaag (which still exists) and many more buildings.

Volker Wessels wants to let different architects design buildings for the Eastside of the Grote Markt, the rules are from the architect Thomas Muller:

*Most be fitting in the 21st century, modern style.
*Have to be also in historical style.

I think, if you mix this two with eachother, you get an terrible combination.
The building line is going to be just like pre-World War 2: 17 meters to the Grote Markt, so there will be an open hole at the back of the designed houses:

De Nieuwe Markt (the New Market), where the most worst building ever build in the Groninger Innercity will stand:
The Groninger Forum

It will be 45 meters high, so it can be seen from the Grote Markt, next to the Martinitoren, the tower of 100 meters high which is the symbol of Groningen. The Forumbuilding will hide an cinema, library, historical museum of Groningen and more. They're also planning an aerial tramway from the top of the Forum over the Innercity.

The reason I started this thread is:

*Your opinion about the Groningen Forum
*Your opinion about the Eastside of the Grote Markt
*Your ideas for reconstruction of the Eastside.

Pictures of the planned Groninger Forum and Eastside:




Picture of the Eastside of the Grote Markt now:

Picture of pre-World War 2

[TheReconstructer]

Grote Markt, Groningen, 1945

[segwaert]

there seems to be too much old stuff around the grand market. the forum is a nice intention to give it a little bit more modern look, but that is not enough. it should be at least twice the height so you can make a better statement. a modern tower next to the church will also be cool, so it can compete with the history of the surroundings. groningen needs more highrises then just this standalone churchtower

[TheReconstructer]

[QUOTE=segwaert;82906485]there seems to be too much old stuff around the grand market. the forum is a nice intention to give it a little bit more modern look, but that is not enough. it should be at least twice the height so you can make a better statement. a modern tower next to the church will also be cool, so it can compete with the history of the surroundings. groningen needs more highrises then just this standalone churchtower[/QUOTE


Twice as high? Oh nice, just like Rotterdam: seeing the highrises but not the tower of the Sint-Laurenskerk.

You know, I think an semi-reconstruction is the best, a few modern buildings at the Eastside of the Grand Market, comparing with some reconstructions of the original buildings. Don't you think it is just the best if you just do that, and no Forum at an backyard-place.

Many Stadjers are proud that Groningen has it old skyline, with the landmarks: the der-Aakerk and the Martinitoren and Martinikerk.

Did you see what they build in Leeuwarden, Friesland? There they build an enormous tower of 115 meter high, which can be seen from 15 kilometer far away and disturbing the landscape of the northern Netherlands.

[Suburbanist]

Originally Posted by TheReconstructer

Twice as high? Oh nice, just like Rotterdam: seeing the highrises but not the tower of the Sint-Laurenskerk.

There are countless European cities with church towers as their highest point, but Rotterdam is unique in the way it was reconstructed. Not all places need to restrict themselves to old height references of 18th Century. What does the city stand to gain by having the church as its main visual reference point? Not much IMO.

You know, I think an semi-reconstruction is the best, a few modern buildings at the Eastside of the Grand Market, comparing with some reconstructions of the original buildings. Don't you think it is just the best if you just do that, and no Forum at an backyard-place.

They could leave the area as it is, with a giant open-plaza filled with nothing but a few artworks. I don't understand these urge of people feeling open plazas can't stand unused.

Did you see what they build in Leeuwarden, Friesland? There they build an enormous tower of 115 meter high, which can be seen from 15 kilometer far away and disturbing the landscape of the northern Netherlands.

What an exaggeration. Do you wanted every city north of Zwolle to not have any skyscraper ever? After all, except Limburg the whole country is flat, any high-rise or medium-rise will be spotted from distance. "Disturbing the landscape" is a gross overstatement.

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by Suburbanist

There are countless European cities with church towers as their highest point, but Rotterdam is unique in the way it was reconstructed. Not all places need to restrict themselves to old height references of 18th Century. What does the city stand to gain by having the church as its main visual reference point? Not much IMO.

They could leave the area as it is, with a giant open-plaza filled with nothing but a few artworks. I don't understand these urge of people feeling open plazas can't stand unused.

What an exaggeration. Do you wanted every city north of Zwolle to not have any skyscraper ever? After all, except Limburg the whole country is flat, any high-rise or medium-rise will be spotted from distance. "Disturbing the landscape" is a gross overstatement.

It's my opinion that I LIKE cities the way they are and not have to be changed with such a 'great and impressive' skyscrapers. The can do that in bigger cities or metropoles but not in smaller cities like Leeuwarden en Groningen. I don't like how they loose their silhouet by some architect or other person which want to make the city looks more 'modern'. You may be a person which likes modernist buildings and skyscrapers but I'm a person of old towns around the globe, reconstructing historic buildings and to keep the past preserved for the future generations, to show them how their ancestors lived in the past. But some people want to thwart this and do make their own decision and want to demolish this for their own EGO's.

They could leave the area as it is, with a giant open-plaza filled with nothing but a few artworks. I don't understand these urge of people feeling open plazas can't stand unused.

Did I said that the plaza should stand unused? Maybe they can make an small square out of it with some terraces and make an cozy square of it, in the midst of some nice reconstructions and modern buildings.
Oh yeah, I almost forgot, this is an thread about how people would've had their plans for the Grote Markt and is suggested for the people who just want to debate it on a POSITIVE way. Maybe the architect should've planted the Forum and the Achmea Tower in Tilburg. Than it should've look better than on the 'flat' countryside, don't you think, my best friend *kuchkuch* from Brabant?
Greetings from Westfriesland, Bosche Bol

[Suburbanist]

Originally Posted by TheReconstructer

I'm a person of old towns around the globe, reconstructing historic buildings and to keep the past preserved for the future generations, to show them how their ancestors lived in the past.

In other words, you want to transform the whole Friesland and Groningen and Drenthe in a giant museum and have their inhabitants live like they were medieval characters in a fair tale.

Do you think people should stop having "modern" jobs and go back to farms as well? After all, 4 or 5 generations ago few people worked in modern offices and so. If you go 10 generations (at most), you can even rip off all railways, flood some polders and turn back to the time in which Groningen was Groningen aan den Zee.

But some people want to thwart this and do make their own decision and want to demolish this for their own EGO's.

Why do you think people build the Leeuwarden tower, for instance? What make the ego of Frisians of 17th CEntury more worth than mine, yours or that of some starchitect?

Oh yeah, I almost forgot, this is an thread about how people would've had their plans for the Grote Markt and is suggested for the people who just want to debate it on a POSITIVE way.

My opinion is: leave the whole area as an open plaza. Put some contemporary art there (sculptures or other installation). Build some very eccentric, but low-rise, building like a museum or something (call Zaha Hadid for that). Voilà, you have a modern area.

[kentvogel]

Useful post - nice to see the rules being enforced. Hopefully I'm not one of the culprits....

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by kentvogel

Useful post - nice to see the rules being enforced. Hopefully I'm not one of the culprits....

No you aren't *sarcastic*

[Tramfreak]

Originally Posted by Kiboko

I don't think the current east side of the market isn't that bad. Those are nice examples of reconstruction architecture of the 502 and 60s. Especially the 'Friesland Bank' and 'Hooghoudt' look very expressive. It would be a waste if those buildings are destroyed.

I agree. They should have given it some more time, people will eventually start to like - or at least tolerate - this architectural style. Those are fine and characteristic examples, just like the Demer in Eindhoven.

Originally Posted by TheReconstructer

You know, I think an semi-reconstruction is the best, a few modern buildings at the Eastside of the Grand Market, comparing with some reconstructions of the original buildings. Don't you think it is just the best if you just do that, and no Forum at an backyard-place.

If they really can't stand the 50's buildings, they could have done something like that indeed. Modern and old combinations can be very nice like for example in:

Vlissingen, NL

Author of the photo: trismagistos, Panoramio

Brno, CZ

Author of the photo: Millenium187, Wikipedia

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by Tramfreak

I agree. They should have given it some more time, people will eventually start to like - or at least tolerate - this architectural style. Those are fine and characteristic examples, just like the Demer in Eindhoven.



If they really can't stand the 50's buildings, they could have done something like that indeed. Modern and old combinations can be very nice like for example in:

Vlissingen, NL

Author of the photo: trismagistos, Panoramio
Brno, CZ

Author of the photo: Millenium187, Wikipedia

This is the kind of rebuilding which I meant for the Grote Markt. Historical with a variaton of modernist buildings

[Kiboko]

I don't think the current east side of the market isn't that bad. Those are nice examples of reconstruction architecture of the 502 and 60s. Especially the 'Friesland Bank' and 'Hooghoudt' look very expressive. It would be a waste if those buildings are destroyed. Imo it is better when they start with the flat on the north side of the market.

Anyway, i don't see the additional value of that weird shaped building in the courtyard. What is it supposed to represent?

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by Kiboko

I don't think the current east side of the market isn't that bad. Those are nice examples of reconstruction architecture of the 502 and 60s. Especially the 'Friesland Bank' and 'Hooghoudt' look very expressive. It would be a waste if those buildings are destroyed. Imo it is better when they start with the flat on the north side of the market.

Anyway, i don't see the additional value of that weird shaped building in the courtyard. What is it supposed to represent?

Kiboko The weird shaped building is the Forum, which is going to have a library, information centre and many more functions. It's a nice building, but doesn't fit in the historic area. The Forum is going to be about 45-50 meters high, half the height of the Martinitoren, the landmark of Groningen. When the buildings are demolished and 'reconstructed' 17 meters further, there is an open space in the courtyard which they are going to call the 'Nieuwe Markt'. On this place the Forum is going to stand on.
I think it's the best to reconstruct the Grote Markt, just like in Dresden, with some nice modern additions. That makes it look modern but also like the time stood still

But they indeed can start the best with the north-side of the market, because these jumps in your visual field when you want to look at the Martinitower. Maybe they can make an kind of semi-reconstruction of it, with a modern entrance and gallery, and a reconstructed top, like it seems it has been always their (with some modern additions like the entrance and etalage)


__________________________________
Nothing is impossible, even the most impossible is possible

[Kiboko]

Pre-World War 2


Planned:

The new situation doesn't really look like a reconstruction to me. It is something completely new. I'm afraid if the designs of these new buildings will be poor as possible because of the current recession in the Netherlands. It is better to wait until the worst crisis is over. Otherwise you get meaningless architecture without any decorations, just like in the eighties. In appearance these buildings won't last much longer than twenty years.

Just take a look at the developments at the so called Zaailand in Leeuwarden (you mentioned this town before). I guess it should represent something old, but to me this is just a collection of dull boxes in some kitschy wrapping paper. When you really want to make the suggestion that the buildings are old, you should at least bring in some differences in floor heights, differences in sizes of windows and differences in the french balconies. If that is too much to ask i'd rather see something modern...

This could also happen to the market of Groningen. Bad choice imo.

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by Kiboko

The new situation doesn't really look like a reconstruction to me. It is something completely new. I'm afraid if the designs of these new buildings will be poor as possible because of the current recession in the Netherlands. It is better to wait until the worst crisis is over. Otherwise you get meaningless architecture without any decorations, just like in the eighties. In appearance these buildings won't last much longer than twenty years.

Just take a look at the developments at the so called Zaailand in Leeuwarden (you mentioned this town before). I guess it should represent something old, but to me this is just a collection of dull boxes in some kitschy wrapping paper. When you really want to make the suggestion that the buildings are old, you should at least bring in some differences in floor heights, differences in sizes of windows and differences in the french balconies. If that is too much to ask i'd rather see something modern...

This could also happen to the market of Groningen. Bad choice imo.

The Zaailand-developments seem nothing to me, it's just some interpretation of modern and old just drawned fast on some paper. I think they could've did better than that. Just some traditional Frisian city-houses on the plaza and you got an nice square The large windows and those other stuff just don't fit in the design. With these buildings you get an not so succesful result, if you built it with those big bricks, which will make it look very new.

Hopefully is this not going to happen to Groningen, but if they just did here and there an reconstruction and on some places an nice modern building, which fits architecturally in the plaza.
Volker Wessels promised to let different architects design houses and other buildings and reconstructions. Also architect Thomas Muller is going to design. The rules that Thomas Muller made are:
*modern and classic
*has to fit in the modern era

So I think with the recession the results of the buildings will fail........

[Tramfreak]

Originally Posted by Kiboko

I think that this sort of buildings can safely get through Welstand, it is cheap and easy to build because of zero innovation and it is easy to design because the same has been done 10000x before. I have seen it everywhere - from Vlissingen to Appingedam.

I was naive when I thought that every architect has his own style. In the Netherlands, the definition of style is the preferred width of french balconies

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by Tramfreak

I think that this sort of buildings can safely get through Welstand, it is cheap and easy to build because of zero innovation and it is easy to design because the same has been done 10000x before. I have seen it everywhere - from Vlissingen to Appingedam.

I was naive when I thought that every architect has his own style. In the Netherlands, the definition of style is the preferred width of french balconies

I thought every architect had his own style of design, instead of copy the others own work. I think there have to be more architects with their own style instead of this 'fake' architects which copies the others works and change it a bit and then you got a building. Unlucky it works this way with many architects......

[Kiboko]

Originally Posted by Tramfreak

I was naive when I thought that every architect has his own style. In the Netherlands, the definition of style is the preferred width of french balconies

I was naïve by thinking every architect has a vision and every building has its own story, but in the end i experienced that getting orders and money was the only thing that really mattered. There are not many architects who are true visionary artists, most of them are just ordinary businessmen. I guess that the only true progressive visionairs can be found amongst just graduated students. But when they work for a while their idealistic vision is gradually blurred by economics and politics.

Originally Posted by TheReconstructer

Well, it's not the fact that we (the Dutch people) are afraid to build skyscrapers, but the only problem we have is that the ground is to soft to build enormous towers on. In Rotterdam they can't go higher than 150-200 meters because then the skyscraper is going to lean.

So why is it possible in the muddy riverdelta of Shanghai? I thought the composition of the soil here is almost the same as in Holland.

[TheReconstructer]

Originally Posted by Kiboko

I was naïve by thinking every architect has a vision and every building has its own story, but in the end i experienced that getting orders and money was the only thing that really mattered. There are not many architects who are true visionary artists, most of them are just ordinary businessmen. I guess that the only true progressive visionairs can be found amongst just graduated students. But when they work for a while their idealistic vision is gradually blurred by economics and politics.

So why is it possible in the muddy riverdelta of Shanghai? I thought the composition of the soil here is almost the same as in Holland.

Also there are more people giving there houses in old cities an new look in 'old style', by changing the gables, doors, windows et cetera. That people do it to give their cities an asset so the city or village looks better
I think there should come more architects from, you know, which are it worth to design buildings, parks, skyscrapers and many more.
Not those businessmen or businesswomen which do a quick design for a building for the money and the city has one building more to let people live in there or make stores or offices in it.
It's about what you feel for a city to build it and what the city needs when it comes to architecture. Not just pen-paper-build-finish-get your money. It's about think-idea-pen-paper-show it-build-get your money. Especially the first two of all those stepps are very important for how a building is going to look.

PS: what is by the way the highest building in Shanghai? Just asking
_______________________________________________________
Nothing is possible, even the most impossibe is possible

[segwaert]

Groningen should get more tall buildings. The new kempkensberg is a real beauty. Why are such developments only possible near a highway? Why are people in holland so afraid for the modern times and highrises?? I constantly hear the statement that dutch people are innovative, but when it comes to building a lot of people are so conservative.

Originally Posted by TheReconstructer

Did you see what they build in Leeuwarden, Friesland? There they build an enormous tower of 115 meter high, which can be seen from 15 kilometer far away and disturbing the landscape of the northern Netherlands.

That is such a nice building. Too bad it is still standing on its own. There should be more skyscrapers arround it.