Tyne Bridge Tower | Gateshead | 47m | 15 Fl | Demolition

***Newcastle Historian*** · October 16th, 2009, 12:29 PM

On February 16th 2009 the cancellation of the proposed Tyne Bridge Tower (former HM Revenue & Customs building) was discussed on the Projects Thread.

CURRENT

RECENT PROPOSAL

This site will HAVE to be developed soon, as part of the 'gentrification' of the Gateshead Quays.

Does anyone know the latest position?

Gherkin · October 16th, 2009, 12:39 PM

The new "tower" looked dreadful - good decision by the council. And what an awful render - it doesn't sell the tower at all. Badly proportioned, characterless and (I bet) cheap materials.

***gothicform*** · October 16th, 2009, 03:49 PM

anyone know when the original building was built, and who designed it?

TownPlanningNE · October 16th, 2009, 03:55 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gothicform

anyone know when the original building was built, and who designed it?

It was built in the 1960's but I have no idea who the architect or developer were.

jwmacintyre · October 16th, 2009, 11:38 PM

It reminds me of ECHO 24 on the Sunderland river side.....awful!!!
Now that is a brutal building on the surrounding land scape if I ever seen one!

Geordie Ahmed · October 17th, 2009, 05:57 AM

That recent proposal render is indeed horrible

TownPlanningNE · October 17th, 2009, 02:11 PM

The last thing I heard about this was a planning application had been approved to renew all of the windows, reclad it and refurbish the offices and put it back on the market.

WilfBurnsFan · October 18th, 2009, 12:16 PM

What is it with curved office buildings? The Gosforth Tower, the proposed Strawberry Place building, now this. It is becoming as much a cliche as the 'wavy roofs' that blighted the 1990s.

BigLebowski · October 18th, 2009, 04:53 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by WilfBurnsFan

What is it with curved office buildings? The Gosforth Tower, the proposed Strawberry Place building, now this. It is becoming as much a cliche as the 'wavy roofs' that blighted the 1990s.

Thank You, someone else has noticed! those god awful wavy rooves on the quayside are already looking dated, in the case of Trinity Gardens only 3 years after completion!

Tyne Bridge Tower is already back on the market for short term leases BTW, so dont expect anything monumental soon....

AngerOfTheNorth · October 18th, 2009, 07:29 PM

Sadly enough, a friend of mine was telling me how he designed a building recently with a wavy roof because (as is usually the case with these wavy-roofed buildings) "it's beside the sea, so it links to the concept of waves and water".

I didn't just bite my tongue, I nearly bit it off...

Talisker · October 19th, 2009, 06:30 AM

A few more renderings of the proposal:

toonlad · October 19th, 2009, 07:15 AM

^ When you see it from the back I can sort of understand why it was knocked back, it stops being a tower and starts being a wall or barrier with that big extension on. I also think it could interfere with future development behind the tower. So it would have been a short-term gain I imagine.

steve_ncl · October 20th, 2009, 12:16 PM

I thought that the Tyne Bridge Tower was planned for demolition?

http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-e...1634-22925735/

I think it’s a shame to be honest as its has the potential to echo 55 degress on the other side of the bridge. I know brutalist concrete architecture isn’t very popular but its important to maintain part of the history from the sixties.

The dilemma is summed up perfectly by the architect Owen Luder, "The question is, do you update the building, or spend an enormous amount of money to knock it down and rebuild?"

Geordie Ahmed · October 20th, 2009, 01:17 PM

I dont like it at all - they should knock it down and build something smaller in its place if possible. It just gets in the way when your coming from Gateshead towards the bridge

Newcastle Guy · October 20th, 2009, 01:22 PM

I would be happy with them to knock it down. It's not the best example of 60's architecture, let's face it. The proposal wouldn't have been much better as it would have added even more bulk to it. It would have been preferable if they'd just reclad the existing building.

steve_ncl · October 20th, 2009, 03:12 PM

I would definitely prefer to see it reused rather than demolished. It just seems a waste of a building, which isn’t really very old.

On the other point about 60’s architecture, this isn’t the best example but it is a landmark on the sky line. My point is that we are unable to really know which buildings will be appreciated in the future and we should avoid the mistakes of the past by demolishing anything that we think is out of date.

Chatton11 · October 20th, 2009, 03:33 PM

Yeah, I get your point, however I would bet everything I will ever own that at no point in the future will anyone think that Tyne Bridge Tower is an attractive building.
I'm no big fan of some other 60s/70s buildings in the area, such as the car park and the Dunston Rocket, by Mr. Luder who you mention earlier, but those two at least are showing brutalism at its 'best', and I can understand (if not agree with) arguments to keep them. For the Tyne Bridge Tower, I agree that demolishing it to leave a bit of wasteland is pointless, if there's a market, tart it up and re-let it, but even better would be to demolish it and build something stunning there. On the subject of Owen Luder, I would be careful quoting anything by someone who is so pompous and self-important as to go on and on about how great his buildings are despite the fact that they have failed, and now serve no purpose other than to blight the skyline. Sorry for the rant, but read a few interviews with him on the subject of his buildings, and he really winds me up. I think I dislike him more than his buildings!

***Newcastle Historian*** · October 20th, 2009, 03:42 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chatton11

Yeah, I get your point, however I would bet everything I will ever own that at no point in the future will anyone think that Tyne Bridge Tower is an attractive building.
I'm no big fan of some other 60s/70s buildings in the area, such as the car park and the Dunston Rocket, by Mr. Luder who you mention earlier, but those two at least are showing brutalism at its 'best', and I can understand (if not agree with) arguments to keep them. For the Tyne Bridge Tower, I agree that demolishing it to leave a bit of wasteland is pointless, if there's a market, tart it up and re-let it, but even better would be to demolish it and build something stunning there. On the subject of Owen Luder, I would be careful quoting anything by someone who is so pompous and self-important as to go on and on about how great his buildings are despite the fact that they have failed, and now serve no purpose other than to blight the skyline. Sorry for the rant, but read a few interviews with him on the subject of his buildings, and he really winds me up. I think I dislike him more than his buildings!

I think you are correct there, though a good quality re-clad/re-furb should go 'some way towards it', but where TBT really scores as a building is FROM the inside, looking out.

It would make excellent flats, as the views (particularly north-facing, as I said in an earlier post on this thread) are WITHOUT COMPARISON. It's not just the marvellous City Centre view, it is the City Centre looking down the spine of the Tyne Bridge itself - irreplaceable!! So it really is worth trying to save it, in my view.

Chatton11 · October 20th, 2009, 03:46 PM

Fair enough Historian, you can do pretty amazing things with a re-clad, however a new building in the same place would have the same views.

***Newcastle Historian*** · October 20th, 2009, 03:57 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chatton11

Fair enough Historian, you can do pretty amazing things with a re-clad, however a new building in the same place would have the same views.

A tad more expensive . . and (as I do not disagree that this would be better) how great would it be to have a REAL new landmark building at the premier entrance point to our great City? There are few places (if any) in this region, where a landmark building is more desirable, than right there!

I'm just not certain how economically viable that would be, especially when stacked up against a re-clad, financially.

My main point is though, I do not think that JUST demolition, without a replacement or only with a very low-rise (NO views) replacement, is a good option at all.

October 16th, 2009, 12:29 PM	#1
*Newcastle Historian* Moderator and Archivist Join Date: Jul 2006 Location: Newcastle upon Tyne Posts: 15,060 Likes (Received): 63	Tyne Bridge Tower \| Gateshead \| 47m \| 15 Fl \| Demolition On February 16th 2009 the cancellation of the proposed Tyne Bridge Tower (former HM Revenue & Customs building) was discussed on the Projects Thread. CURRENT RECENT PROPOSAL This site will HAVE to be developed soon, as part of the 'gentrification' of the Gateshead Quays. Does anyone know the latest position?

October 16th, 2009, 11:38 PM	#5
jwmacintyre Registered User Join Date: Dec 2007 Location: NE2 Posts: 134 Likes (Received): 0	It reminds me of ECHO 24 on the Sunderland river side.....awful!!! Now that is a brutal building on the surrounding land scape if I ever seen one! __________________ Music doesn't lie. If there is something to be changed in this world, then it can only happen through music. Jimi Hendrix

October 19th, 2009, 06:30 AM	#11
Talisker dE/dm Join Date: Aug 2002 Location: Newcastle Posts: 1,713 Likes (Received): 24	A few more renderings of the proposal: __________________ There are other Annapurnas in the lives of men - Maurice Herzog

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Switch to Linear Mode Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

October 16th, 2009, 12:39 PM	#2
Gherkin actual gherkin Join Date: May 2005 Location: Leeds Posts: 13,723 Likes (Received): 156	The new "tower" looked dreadful - good decision by the council. And what an awful render - it doesn't sell the tower at all. Badly proportioned, characterless and (I bet) cheap materials.

October 16th, 2009, 03:49 PM	#3
*gothicform* Bossman Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: not london Posts: 29,168 Likes (Received): 486	anyone know when the original building was built, and who designed it?

October 17th, 2009, 05:57 AM	#6
Geordie Ahmed Registered User Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne Posts: 963 Likes (Received): 0	That recent proposal render is indeed horrible

October 17th, 2009, 02:11 PM	#7
TownPlanningNE Registered User Join Date: Feb 2007 Location: Durham/Newcastle Posts: 1,570 Likes (Received): 1	The last thing I heard about this was a planning application had been approved to renew all of the windows, reclad it and refurbish the offices and put it back on the market.

October 18th, 2009, 12:16 PM	#8
WilfBurnsFan Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Newcastle upon Tyne Posts: 2,381 Likes (Received): 15	What is it with curved office buildings? The Gosforth Tower, the proposed Strawberry Place building, now this. It is becoming as much a cliche as the 'wavy roofs' that blighted the 1990s.

October 18th, 2009, 07:29 PM	#10
AngerOfTheNorth Architectural Dogsbody Join Date: Aug 2008 Location: Newcastle upon Tyne/London Posts: 2,858 Likes (Received): 6	Sadly enough, a friend of mine was telling me how he designed a building recently with a wavy roof because (as is usually the case with these wavy-roofed buildings) "it's beside the sea, so it links to the concept of waves and water". I didn't just bite my tongue, I nearly bit it off...

October 19th, 2009, 07:15 AM	#12
toonlad Urban Environmentalist Join Date: May 2007 Location: Whitley Bay, nr. Newcastle upon Tyne, UK Posts: 1,534 Likes (Received): 10	^ When you see it from the back I can sort of understand why it was knocked back, it stops being a tower and starts being a wall or barrier with that big extension on. I also think it could interfere with future development behind the tower. So it would have been a short-term gain I imagine.

October 20th, 2009, 12:16 PM	#13
steve_ncl Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 31 Likes (Received): 0	I thought that the Tyne Bridge Tower was planned for demolition? http://www.journallive.co.uk/north-e...1634-22925735/ I think it’s a shame to be honest as its has the potential to echo 55 degress on the other side of the bridge. I know brutalist concrete architecture isn’t very popular but its important to maintain part of the history from the sixties. The dilemma is summed up perfectly by the architect Owen Luder, "The question is, do you update the building, or spend an enormous amount of money to knock it down and rebuild?"

October 20th, 2009, 01:17 PM	#14
Geordie Ahmed Registered User Join Date: Sep 2007 Location: Newcastle Upon Tyne Posts: 963 Likes (Received): 0	I dont like it at all - they should knock it down and build something smaller in its place if possible. It just gets in the way when your coming from Gateshead towards the bridge

October 20th, 2009, 01:22 PM	#15
Newcastle Guy Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 8,955 Likes (Received): 18	I would be happy with them to knock it down. It's not the best example of 60's architecture, let's face it. The proposal wouldn't have been much better as it would have added even more bulk to it. It would have been preferable if they'd just reclad the existing building.

October 20th, 2009, 03:12 PM	#16
steve_ncl Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Posts: 31 Likes (Received): 0	I would definitely prefer to see it reused rather than demolished. It just seems a waste of a building, which isn’t really very old. On the other point about 60’s architecture, this isn’t the best example but it is a landmark on the sky line. My point is that we are unable to really know which buildings will be appreciated in the future and we should avoid the mistakes of the past by demolishing anything that we think is out of date.

October 20th, 2009, 03:33 PM	#17
Chatton11 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Newcastle Posts: 712 Likes (Received): 4	Yeah, I get your point, however I would bet everything I will ever own that at no point in the future will anyone think that Tyne Bridge Tower is an attractive building. I'm no big fan of some other 60s/70s buildings in the area, such as the car park and the Dunston Rocket, by Mr. Luder who you mention earlier, but those two at least are showing brutalism at its 'best', and I can understand (if not agree with) arguments to keep them. For the Tyne Bridge Tower, I agree that demolishing it to leave a bit of wasteland is pointless, if there's a market, tart it up and re-let it, but even better would be to demolish it and build something stunning there. On the subject of Owen Luder, I would be careful quoting anything by someone who is so pompous and self-important as to go on and on about how great his buildings are despite the fact that they have failed, and now serve no purpose other than to blight the skyline. Sorry for the rant, but read a few interviews with him on the subject of his buildings, and he really winds me up. I think I dislike him more than his buildings!

October 20th, 2009, 03:46 PM	#19
Chatton11 Registered User Join Date: Oct 2007 Location: Newcastle Posts: 712 Likes (Received): 4	Fair enough Historian, you can do pretty amazing things with a re-clad, however a new building in the same place would have the same views.