daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > London Metro Area

London Metro Area London Calling...



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Rating: Thread Rating: 7 votes, 5.00 average.
Old January 29th, 2013, 12:20 AM   #101
Yorkshire Boy
Registered Loser
 
Yorkshire Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Leeds
Posts: 2,603
Likes (Received): 200

Oh my...
Yorkshire Boy no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old January 29th, 2013, 12:26 AM   #102
Pants1254
Registered User
 
Pants1254's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Location: London
Posts: 135
Likes (Received): 67

OH MY GOD Iv just had sex with my computer (I need a life badly) Looks bloody amazing
Pants1254 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 12:35 AM   #103
woodgnome
CEO, Dingly Dell Corp.
 
woodgnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London
Posts: 894
Likes (Received): 397

__________________
London is not a city. It is more like a country, and living in it is like living in Holland or Belgium. Its completeness makes it deceptive - there are sidewalks from one frontier to the other - and its hugeness makes it possible for everyone to invent his own city. My London is not your London, though everyone's Washington, DC is pretty much the same.
The London Embassy - Paul Theroux
woodgnome no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 12:39 AM   #104
Yorkshire Boy
Registered Loser
 
Yorkshire Boy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2009
Location: Leeds
Posts: 2,603
Likes (Received): 200

I hate to say it, but it looks so New Yorky.
Yorkshire Boy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 01:12 AM   #105
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,060
Likes (Received): 1719

There are some really awful architectural clichés in this project and I can't fathom the reasoning for the design of the main tower at all (it's not that great). Some of the low rise facades are genuinely awful (the low rise in the forth render for example has a rather cack handed cladding when you see it from Southwark Street) but the ground level has good things going for it and the fact the scheme has been separated into individual blocks is a positive, it's just a shame once you get into the detail you realise how genuinely dull the whole development is. For such a prime spot, opposite St Paul's and next door to One Blackfriars this really needs to be of the highest exemplary design quality and this simply isn't.
__________________

aclifford liked this post
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 01:41 AM   #106
Zin5ki
Unimposing goose
 
Zin5ki's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2012
Location: London
Posts: 149
Likes (Received): 56

Time for a spot of irony:

Zin5ki no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 02:31 AM   #107
Black Cat
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2002
Posts: 1,870
Likes (Received): 188

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
There are some really awful architectural clichés in this project and I can't fathom the reasoning for the design of the main tower at all (it's not that great). Some of the low rise facades are genuinely awful (the low rise in the forth render for example has a rather cack handed cladding when you see it from Southwark Street) but the ground level has good things going for it and the fact the scheme has been separated into individual blocks is a positive, it's just a shame once you get into the detail you realise how genuinely dull the whole development is. For such a prime spot, opposite St Paul's and next door to One Blackfriars this really needs to be of the highest exemplary design quality and this simply isn't.
I concur. Urbanistically the general layout and massing looks great, as is the relationship with the embankment - but the elevational designs and elements could be improved. Lets hope that there is an interest to review the facades and perhaps add some crowning details, particularly of the tallest tower.
Black Cat no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 03:59 AM   #108
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,060
Likes (Received): 1719

Quote:
Originally Posted by Black Cat View Post
and perhaps add some crowning details, particularly of the tallest tower.
I did mention this at the planning open day and noted a facade run off (actually similar to the second smaller tower) or at least an openness to it rather than the white horizontal band would create a better relationship and lightness of touch against the sky. The architect felt the opposite, that the solid crown denoted a sense that the tower had essentially been 'pulled' from the ground upwards and that this notion of the individual towers growing out of the ground level was an artistic message that ran throughout each of them.

Again, going back to my original point about the buildings themselves it is just generally the complete lack of diversity among them that worries me. Essentially they are just kit of part blocks with a slightly inventive cladding on a couple of them, with standardised elements on the other (especially the two at the back, away from the river). Why not use the fact the railway runs through the site to delineate the floor plan of the north two towers at least? I appreciate there were problems associated with building over the railway line, but slightly shifting one of the facades to run alongside the slight curve of the railway arches would at least introduce something eye catching, from the Millennium Bridge especially.

All that is being introduced here is a micro-Canary Wharf style set of towers that really don't live up to the standards of tall buildings originally proposed and now being built in the locale. It's a shame, because it wouldn't take much change to make them that.

The elephant in the room that hasn't been discussed, of course, is that the shrinking of One Blackfriars due to the usual hysteria of the typical subjects, has once again resulted in a height ceiling that no developer is willing to break. The days of a varied, diverse height and aesthetically dramatic skyline cluster have been sadly eroded further and further away from reality.
__________________

i_like_concrete liked this post

Last edited by DarJoLe; January 29th, 2013 at 04:16 AM.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 04:19 AM   #109
Gherkin
actual gherkin
 
Gherkin's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: London
Posts: 13,732
Likes (Received): 375

Indeed, the band at the top makes the taller tower look a lot like this:

Gherkin no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 05:09 AM   #110
RugBurn
Registered User
 
RugBurn's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: NEW YORK
Posts: 222
Likes (Received): 3

Im not sure this is the right place for a cluster and Im kind of tired of buildings that step up. Reminds me of the Shell redevelopment
RugBurn no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 11:40 AM   #111
i_like_concrete
cockney sparrow
 
i_like_concrete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 3,625
Likes (Received): 175

The biggest shame is the height reduction of 1 Blackfriars, the standardised cladding of the towers in this development might have been more palatable if it had been in the shadow of a much taller dramatically shaped 1BF, instead it is on a par with it height wise and both are as prominent as each other. Another loss for London's skyline.
__________________
Mother earth couldn't give a shit about your iphone or social networking strategy

Flickr

Pinterest
i_like_concrete no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 12:19 PM   #112
hifive605
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2011
Posts: 410
Likes (Received): 34

excellent form and massing, great dialogue with the surroundings. Facades at the Back dull but for prominent ones clean and interesting. Most importantly this project has VISION and ambition
hifive605 no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 02:40 PM   #113
Mr Bricks
Registered User
 
Mr Bricks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 5,685
Likes (Received): 329

Is it really wise to have cluster of skyscrapers so close to the Thames? Looks awkward and makes the river looks smaller, sort of like a tunnel. If this trend continues, in a few decades you'll have a glass wall stretching all the way from Vauxhall to London Bridge. What do Londoners say about this?
Mr Bricks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 02:47 PM   #114
LondonFox
BANNED
 
Join Date: Nov 2010
Location: London, UK
Posts: 4,283
Likes (Received): 742

Bring it on!
LondonFox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 02:49 PM   #115
i_like_concrete
cockney sparrow
 
i_like_concrete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 3,625
Likes (Received): 175

Yes, if this trend continues and all of the historic and culturally important buildings along the Thames are destroyed then I guess that would be the result, a glass Venice! How exciting.
__________________
Mother earth couldn't give a shit about your iphone or social networking strategy

Flickr

Pinterest
i_like_concrete no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 02:54 PM   #116
Mr Bricks
Registered User
 
Mr Bricks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 5,685
Likes (Received): 329

^There are countless crappy old post-war buildings along the South Bank i.e. lots of potential for redevelopment. Historic buildings hemmed in by skyscrapers is nothing new in London.
Mr Bricks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 03:08 PM   #117
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 17,060
Likes (Received): 1719

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bricks View Post
Is it really wise to have cluster of skyscrapers so close to the Thames? Looks awkward and makes the river looks smaller, sort of like a tunnel.
But it will never be a tunnel, because it is highly unlikely anything of this height will be built opposite, or in fact anywhere from Southwark Bridge to Westminster Bridge on the north bank.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bricks View Post
If this trend continues, in a few decades you'll have a glass wall stretching all the way from Vauxhall to London Bridge. What do Londoners say about this?
I would imagine most simply would not care. As for myself, bring it on. It will make a nice counterpoint to the stale, timid architecture along the north bank.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bricks View Post
^There are countless crappy old post-war buildings along the South Bank i.e. lots of potential for redevelopment. Historic buildings hemmed in by skyscrapers is nothing new in London.
I wouldn't say countless. A few by London Bridge, one or two by Southwark Bridge, a handful heading to Vauxhall. The rest have already been renovated, are being, or are listed.

Last edited by DarJoLe; January 29th, 2013 at 03:14 PM.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 03:39 PM   #118
Mr Bricks
Registered User
 
Mr Bricks's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2005
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 5,685
Likes (Received): 329

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
But it will never be a tunnel, because it is highly unlikely anything of this height will be built opposite, or in fact anywhere from Southwark Bridge to Westminster Bridge on the north bank.
Yeah the North Bank is different so I guess tunnel is the wrong term.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
I would imagine most simply would not care. As for myself, bring it on. It will make a nice counterpoint to the stale, timid architecture along the north bank.
I think most people would say Victoria Embankment is the most successful part of the river banks. Around Millennium Bridge it is grim though.

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
I wouldn't say countless. A few by London Bridge, one or two by Southwark Bridge, a handful heading to Vauxhall. The rest have already been renovated, are being, or are listed.
I would say 90% of what was built after the war between London Bridge and Westminster Bridge is crap.

I think one of the greatest things about the Thames is its width and the fact that it is lined with low-rise buildings which make the river and its surroundings feel airy and spacious. That is something worth saving. In my opinion most buildings along the Thames should be between 4-8 storeys tall (with some exceptions). Modern takes on old warehouses and wharves (sort of what the Dutch, the Germans and the Poles are doing) would be a great idea, lining the river with shops, bars, restaurants and apartments instead of huge structures that would make the Thames feel narrow, dark and depressing.
Mr Bricks no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 03:42 PM   #119
ill tonkso
Portsmouths Finest, Maybe
 
ill tonkso's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: St. Albans
Posts: 15,312
Likes (Received): 916

Indeed, buildings should step down to it like a valley as opposed to a canyon.
ill tonkso no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 29th, 2013, 04:02 PM   #120
i_like_concrete
cockney sparrow
 
i_like_concrete's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2008
Location: London
Posts: 3,625
Likes (Received): 175

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mr Bricks View Post
I think most people would say Victoria Embankment is the most successful part of the river banks. Around Millennium Bridge it is grim though.
Victoria Embankment a success!? You are joking right? It's a six lane motorway for almost its entire length.

The Southbank is by far the most successful part of the riverbank, it has everything necessary to make it an enjoyable and buzzing place to be, which is why it is full of people and the North bank is full of cars. Have you ever been there?

Quote:
I think one of the greatest things about the Thames is its width and the fact that it is lined with low-rise buildings which make the river and its surroundings feel airy and spacious. That is something worth saving. In my opinion most buildings along the Thames should be between 4-8 storeys tall (with some exceptions). Modern takes on old warehouses and wharves (sort of what the Dutch, the Germans and the Poles are doing) would be a great idea, lining the river with shops, bars, restaurants and apartments instead of huge structures that would make the Thames feel narrow, dark and depressing.
Yes, we should abandon what is making the Southbank a thriving success and embark on turning it into Wapping, that well known centre of culture and vibrancy.
__________________
Mother earth couldn't give a shit about your iphone or social networking strategy

Flickr

Pinterest

.Adam liked this post

Last edited by i_like_concrete; January 29th, 2013 at 04:08 PM.
i_like_concrete no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 12:23 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu