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

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

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


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old June 12th, 2005, 12:59 PM   #61
Speakerbox
BANNED
 
Speakerbox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2004
Location: Brum
Posts: 62
Likes (Received): 0

I didnt like it at first, but it really grows on you and now I love it.
Speakerbox no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old June 12th, 2005, 01:34 PM   #62
bileduct
malu cachu
 
bileduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 396
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Britannia
Awful building... and like Selfridges will probably be built very cheaply and end up looking pretty shoddy even after a few years. I'll be very dismayed if they take this any further.
Oh dear, not a lot of ambivalence there. Do you really hate it that much?

I rather like Alsop on the whole (don't know if that automatically disqualifies me from having a sensible opinion in your eyes ), but to me this project gives a tantalising suggestion that MAKE might just turn out to be a good league above, in a sense analagous to the way that James Stirling's later work so clearly out-classes Terry Farrell's. Vortex looked like a one-liner and a crap one at that, but there seem to be hints of real architectural ideas in this, thoughtfully worked through in an interesting and skilful manner. A single scanned rendering is a long way from a finished building of course, and there are huge question marks over all sorts of things, but it does look at least to have exciting possibilities.

Also, while Birmingham unquestionably does have a bad track record of failing to deliver on initial high design aspirations - step forward in disgrace, Millennium Point - tarring Selfridges with the same brush seems a bit unfair, IMO. It's not an art gallery or public building and doesn't have any aspirations to being a "masterly, correct and magnificent play of masses brought together in light", it's of necessity a big shiny wrapper for a bit of flexible, consumerist retail space. IMO it works brilliantly precisely because it takes this on board and celebrates it, almost to the point of parody (I mean, basing it on a Paco Rabane dress, pur-lease...). Future Systems were also extremely careful to select their materials so that they would still look good even after years of grimy Midlands rain, and have apparently tested them quite thoroughly, so fingers crossed. It seemed to be looking quite beautiful when I was there in April, certainly.

This Cube thing is definitely a do-it-properly-or-don't-do-it-at-all building though.
bileduct no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 01:39 PM   #63
bileduct
malu cachu
 
bileduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 396
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skopie
The yellow colour is disgusting. Also the elevated walkway won't have a good impact on the street scene surrounding the building.
They're not streets, they're canals, so the bridges are kinda necessary

From the description the bits that look yellow in the rendering are supposed to be wooden fretwork as well, so they shouldn't be yellow in real life, just wood colour.

Not suggesting you're not allowed not to like it, though.
bileduct no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 02:33 PM   #64
Skopie
Registered User
 
Skopie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wakefield
Posts: 566
Likes (Received): 0

A less ambiguous render would be handy. I'm always suspiscious when they miss parts out on a render.
Skopie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 02:38 PM   #65
birminghamculture
BANNED
 
birminghamculture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skopie
A less ambiguous render would be handy. I'm always suspiscious when they miss parts out on a render.
Thats the only one we have at the moment until the 17th of June, when all 6 designs go on display in the Mailbox, Birmingham.

Dont worry we will bring you more when we get them.

Yep, Bileduct they are canals, Birminghams jewel. The water reflection will look fantastic on this building, especially with everything else underway in the area.
birminghamculture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 02:42 PM   #66
birminghamculture
BANNED
 
birminghamculture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 2

The site at the moment

[img]http://************/4q4fw7[/img]
[img]http://************/4q4g0o[/img]
[img]http://************/4q4g41[/img]
[img]http://************/4q4g7p[/img]
birminghamculture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 03:16 PM   #67
Accura4Matalan
Registered User
 
Accura4Matalan's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2004
Location: Hinckley, UK
Posts: 13,602
Likes (Received): 1556

I dont like it that much. The render is a bit crap though so I'll reserve judgement, and its certainly an improvement on what is there.
Accura4Matalan está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 05:55 PM   #68
Skopie
Registered User
 
Skopie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wakefield
Posts: 566
Likes (Received): 0

I like the buildings already there, they'd look great after a spruce up, the only thing this has on them is height.
Skopie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 05:58 PM   #69
birminghamculture
BANNED
 
birminghamculture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skopie
I like the buildings already there, they'd look great after a spruce up, the only thing this has on them is height.
They are being used.
birminghamculture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 06:22 PM   #70
Urban Dave
In Urbanity I Trust
 
Urban Dave's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2004
Location: Urban Area
Posts: 15,114
Likes (Received): 1546

I don't like the cube, sorry The things on the top of the desing make it look like anything but not a cube. The other projects are great.
Urban Dave no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 06:43 PM   #71
Skopie
Registered User
 
Skopie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wakefield
Posts: 566
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by birminghamculture
They are being used.
Are the old buildings not being demolished for this then?
Skopie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 07:00 PM   #72
birminghamculture
BANNED
 
birminghamculture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 2

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skopie
Are the old buildings not being demolished for this then?
There being incoporated into the scheme I think - When we get further ideas were post them on here.
birminghamculture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 08:30 PM   #73
Britannia
Yorkshire Pud
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 225
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Oh dear, not a lot of ambivalence there. Do you really hate it that much?

I rather like Alsop on the whole (don't know if that automatically disqualifies me from having a sensible opinion in your eyes ), but to me this project gives a tantalising suggestion that MAKE might just turn out to be a good league above, in a sense analagous to the way that James Stirling's later work so clearly out-classes Terry Farrell's. Vortex looked like a one-liner and a crap one at that, but there seem to be hints of real architectural ideas in this, thoughtfully worked through in an interesting and skilful manner. A single scanned rendering is a long way from a finished building of course, and there are huge question marks over all sorts of things, but it does look at least to have exciting possibilities.

Also, while Birmingham unquestionably does have a bad track record of failing to deliver on initial high design aspirations - step forward in disgrace, Millennium Point - tarring Selfridges with the same brush seems a bit unfair, IMO. It's not an art gallery or public building and doesn't have any aspirations to being a "masterly, correct and magnificent play of masses brought together in light", it's of necessity a big shiny wrapper for a bit of flexible, consumerist retail space. IMO it works brilliantly precisely because it takes this on board and celebrates it, almost to the point of parody (I mean, basing it on a Paco Rabane dress, pur-lease...). Future Systems were also extremely careful to select their materials so that they would still look good even after years of grimy Midlands rain, and have apparently tested them quite thoroughly, so fingers crossed. It seemed to be looking quite beautiful when I was there in April, certainly.

This Cube thing is definitely a do-it-properly-or-don't-do-it-at-all building though.
To be honest I've been very disappointed by Make. Their first scheme, King's Reach Tower, looks ok from some views and has a nice overall geometry (especially in terms of the public realm), but they spoil it with gimmicky random coloured panels. Colour can be used skilfully, i.e. Jean Neuvel's Torre Agbar, but Make seem to use it as an excuse to not put much effort into the basic building shape. Their scheme for offices in Paddington looks similarly cheap and superficial. Obviously it's difficult to judge a practice that hasn't built anything yet, but I'm just not sure that their end product will be very good!

Will Alsop has produced some decent buildings... Palestra is turning out well and his administration building in Marseille is quite a stunning sight, but to me they are his conventional designs and I don't know how well something like New Islington or his Barnsley scheme will actually work in real life. I'd say I actually prefer Alsop to Make, because at least Alsop introduces interesting geometry... Make seem to be a company of coloured panels.

Selfridges shimmers beautifully from a distance... but then you get up close and see how it tacks on to the rest of the centre, with no attempt to integrate. Then you walk up close and notice that it is actually covered in aluminium circles with what seems to be a wooden background painted blue. At street level it looks like a Blue Peter job... utterly tacky and not at all as expensive as the goods it sells. However, I like the central interior space, the terrace and the sense of fun about it... I just wish they'd spent a bit more money on it. I much prefer the little shell-like cafe in the square... the true gem of the Bull Ring imo.

I'm not against daring architecture at all, but there's innovation that works and there's innovation that results in downright ugly architecture. This to me falls in the second category, and no matter what daring architectural touches you add to a building of those proportions, it will end up casting a big dark shadow and will look like a fat lump on the skyline. Not what you want. Obviously it will be refined and worked up, but I just don't see it working, especially considering Birmingham's lacklustre track record of delivering high profile schemes. Just look at Masshouse... an unbelievable chance to correct the mistakes of the past, and just look at the first block that's going up... a truly terrible block of flats.

On a side note, although Ken was obviously one of the guys behind Swiss Re, and some of his staff were too, but I much prefer the direction taken by the guys who went to Hamilton Associates instead. I work with a few of them and their ideas, while more conventional, are to me far more valid because they're not 'look at me' architects. They want to design buildings that work, which at the end of the day is what counts.
__________________
rulebritannia
Britannia no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 10:13 PM   #74
Prestonian
Registered User
 
Prestonian's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Posts: 937
Likes (Received): 62

I can see where concerns arise and I probably share some of them but I really feel that this is going to be a tremendous project. I know MAKE is relatively unproven but I think that is what makes this project so much more intriguing and exciting. It means that the oppurtunity is there for Birmingham to break new ground and to set a trend for future innovation and create an area where architects will be challenged to produce their best work. The building may perhaps end up looking awful but in order to gain something extraordinary risks may need to be taken. The fact that MAKE is fighting to prove itself perhaps means they will be striving extra hard to produce a qulaity final product.

The greatest impossibility is trying to judge the calibre of this building from this relatively crude render. As others have said, read the description of it and try and visualise what a realised version of this building could look like. Tidy up the sketch in your mind and imagine real materials on it rather than coloured pencil and I at least start to visualise something very appetising. I still don't expect you all to agree but I think there is great potential behind this design and I thought more people would have at least appreciated the attempt to be different.
Prestonian no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 10:25 PM   #75
Skopie
Registered User
 
Skopie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wakefield
Posts: 566
Likes (Received): 0

It's the attempt to be different that I don't like. MAKE are trying to be new and innovative on all their projects, without thinknig about the context of the building.

The boundries need to be pushed, but they need to be pushed in a way that works and is functional. At the moment, MAKE don't seem to be working in the best interests of the built enviroment, but the interests of their own practise.
Skopie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 12th, 2005, 10:28 PM   #76
Citrus-Fruit
BANNED
 
Citrus-Fruit's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2005
Posts: 267
Likes (Received): 3

Quote:
Originally Posted by Skopie
It's the attempt to be different that I don't like. MAKE are trying to be new and innovative on all their projects, without thinknig about the context of the building.

The boundries need to be pushed, but they need to be pushed in a way that works and is functional. At the moment, MAKE don't seem to be working in the best interests of the built enviroment, but the interests of their own practise.
They are because it was the chosen design out of 6 - they had to base thier design on the surrounding area and buildings.

Skopie come on buddy, you really think they wouldnt take into account the loaction etc before going into a presentation hoping to gain £60m worth of work?

Deary Me.
Citrus-Fruit no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2005, 04:28 PM   #77
bileduct
malu cachu
 
bileduct's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 396
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Britannia
To be honest I've been very disappointed by Make. Their first scheme, King's Reach Tower, looks ok from some views and has a nice overall geometry (especially in terms of the public realm), but they spoil it with gimmicky random coloured panels. Colour can be used skilfully, i.e. Jean Neuvel's Torre Agbar, but Make seem to use it as an excuse to not put much effort into the basic building shape. Their scheme for offices in Paddington looks similarly cheap and superficial. Obviously it's difficult to judge a practice that hasn't built anything yet, but I'm just not sure that their end product will be very good!

Will Alsop has produced some decent buildings... Palestra is turning out well and his administration building in Marseille is quite a stunning sight, but to me they are his conventional designs and I don't know how well something like New Islington or his Barnsley scheme will actually work in real life. I'd say I actually prefer Alsop to Make, because at least Alsop introduces interesting geometry... Make seem to be a company of coloured panels.

Selfridges shimmers beautifully from a distance... but then you get up close and see how it tacks on to the rest of the centre, with no attempt to integrate. Then you walk up close and notice that it is actually covered in aluminium circles with what seems to be a wooden background painted blue. At street level it looks like a Blue Peter job... utterly tacky and not at all as expensive as the goods it sells. However, I like the central interior space, the terrace and the sense of fun about it... I just wish they'd spent a bit more money on it. I much prefer the little shell-like cafe in the square... the true gem of the Bull Ring imo.

I'm not against daring architecture at all, but there's innovation that works and there's innovation that results in downright ugly architecture. This to me falls in the second category, and no matter what daring architectural touches you add to a building of those proportions, it will end up casting a big dark shadow and will look like a fat lump on the skyline. Not what you want. Obviously it will be refined and worked up, but I just don't see it working, especially considering Birmingham's lacklustre track record of delivering high profile schemes. Just look at Masshouse... an unbelievable chance to correct the mistakes of the past, and just look at the first block that's going up... a truly terrible block of flats.

On a side note, although Ken was obviously one of the guys behind Swiss Re, and some of his staff were too, but I much prefer the direction taken by the guys who went to Hamilton Associates instead. I work with a few of them and their ideas, while more conventional, are to me far more valid because they're not 'look at me' architects. They want to design buildings that work, which at the end of the day is what counts.
Wise words as ever Brit

The Paddington scheme you mention seems to have completely passed me by, but I quite liked the Kings Reach Tower one (though you've probably seen more of it than I have). Given the limitations of recladding as an activity they seemed to make a decent fist of taking it beyond a crude re-wallpapering, turning the bland, shapeless existing form into a tightly coherent and arresting new one with a clear sense of itself as an integrated series of objects - the patches of colour seemed to add useful horizontal relationships to compliment the vertical 'fins'. The actual shade of blue itself looked a bit ropey (trying too hard to distance themselves from the stereotypically Fosteresque, perhaps?), but colours and finishes always end up looking different in real life to renderings anyway. Vortex definitely looked like a badly judged play to the gallery, but their Dartford scheme looks interesting, and relatively understated too. If that's to be their first completed building it'll be interesting to see what they actually deliver.

The thing that excites me about The Cube is that it suggests that MAKE might be trying to combine the broad palette of colours, shapes and materials that Alsop uses with the more formal structured layouts that you get from some of Fosters' higher quality designs (rather than Alsop's wilfully arbitrary expressionism) and that seems like something genuinely new and interesting. You could almost see The Cube as making this centrifugal/centripetal tension explicit - a wildly shaped building barely contained within a flimsy rectilinear cage.

---------------------------------------------

Re: Selfridges - the join to the rest of the Bullring is the crowning glory of Benoy's ineptitude, IMO. A scheme like the Bullring, purposely designed to resemble a series of separate and heterogenous facades, ought by definition to be able to deal with ... another separate and hetrogenous facade (which after all is all that Selfridges is). It really shouldn't have been that hard - they just had to take the join on board as yet another natural and inevitable contrast. Instead they appear to have completely misunderstood the point of their own design strategy by sticking that rectangular barrier between Selfridges and the rest - like a piece of greaseproof paper between slices of cake in a teashop, a completely unnecessary intervention that snatches defeat when victory actually seemed the easier option. Hilarious, but a flaw it's hard to pin on Selfridges itself.

Masshouse is definitely shockingly poor (bewilderingly so, given that the same grand project has given rise to the world class City Park Gate proposal on the site next door), but its a symptom of a lack of ambition - letting the developers rely on their in-house architects - rather than an inability to deliver on a high ambition, isn't it?

Re: Hamilton Associates - that's probably the difference between a professional like you and a poncey dilettante like me
bileduct no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2005, 06:51 PM   #78
Skopie
Registered User
 
Skopie's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2005
Location: Wakefield
Posts: 566
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Citrus-Fruit
They are because it was the chosen design out of 6 - they had to base thier design on the surrounding area and buildings.

Skopie come on buddy, you really think they wouldnt take into account the loaction etc before going into a presentation hoping to gain £60m worth of work?

Deary Me.
They had to base their design on the site obviosuly, but not for one minute I think they even thought of nearby buildings. The building would look hideous anywhere though, so it probably doesn't matter wether it's next to a skyscraper or a row of victorain shops.

What do you think was the main objective of the company when designing this building was, to design a beautiful building that will stand the test of the time, or to earn a million pound contract? The best way to earn a contract is with an attention seeking LOOK AT ME building, not with a beautiful building.

Also have you seen the Vortex building, that was planned for central London? It would'be looked out of place in Tokyo, and was the biggest gimmicky pile of shite I've seen, another example of MAKE's attention seeking architecture, and lack of respect for the future built enviroment.
Skopie no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 14th, 2005, 08:14 PM   #79
birminghamculture
BANNED
 
birminghamculture's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 2,288
Likes (Received): 2

MAKE Architects to create final phase of The Mailbox

Ken Shuttleworth’s MAKE Architects have been announced as the overall winner in the concept design competition for the final phase of The Mailbox.

MAKE's winning entry entitled, ‘The Cube’ beat off exceptionally strong competition from leading London and Birmingham practices to snatch the coveted prize of becoming architects for the final phase of The Mailbox. Now appointed, the MAKE team will set to work on preparing the iconic design for planning permission from the city council.

Alan Chatham, Director, said: “We have been overwhelmed by the talent and effort which each of the architects has displayed. It was extremely difficult to choose the first place practice, but in the end the judging panel were unanimous that MAKE should be elected as the winner.”

With an atrium which twists round as it climbs to the full height of the building, the 17 storey steel and glass ‘mathematically pure’ cube structure is enclosed by an innovative fretwork screen with a cut-a-way open side facing away from the canal at the top. It is hoped the unique building will become the next opportunity to put the city on the architectural world stage.

The £60 million project will be an extension of the existing mixed-use offering in The Mailbox, with 390,000 sq ft of accommodation housing high quality residential, offices, restaurants, a small boutique hotel and retail intended to be aimed at the homeware sector. There will also be a rooftop restaurant, reached by a scenic glass lift offering panoramic views over the city.

Ken Shuttleworth commented: "We are absolutely delighted, this is our second high profile project in Birmingham, following Digbeth coach station, and we hope to be able to open a Birmingham office on the strength of winning this competition.”

Five invited practices entered the six week competition alongside MAKE; these included the original designers of The Mailbox, Associated Architects; Marks Barfield, the creators of the London Eye; D5, known for their terminal extension at Birmingham Airport; Glenn Howells Architects, who are currently working on the Liverpool Lime Street project and Kinetic AIU, who designed Birmingham’s Kingsbury Locks.

Glenn Howells produced a stunning slender 28 storey rectangular tower, which would provide stunning reflections on the adjacent canal; D5 used an innovative concept to design a unique building to stand out from other developments in Birmingham and reflect the complexity of the concept with a number of cantilevers, levels and materials; Marks Barfield designed three twisting gold towers, emerging from a garden podium; Kinetic designed dual buildings focused around a piazza with an encircling crystalline louvered skin to give the scheme an instantly recognisable identity; Associated Architects followed the theme of a sanctuary to develop a scheme which would encourage people into the centre of the scheme where an inner courtyard would continue the exclusive ambiance of the original Mailbox.

The public will have the unusual opportunity to view all six final submissions in a week long exhibition taking place as part of the Architecture Week events taking place at The Mailbox from 17-26 June.

With MAKE now crowned as the winner, the pre planning application process has already begun with the aim to start on site at the beginning of 2006 with total completion scheduled for 2007.

Alan continued: “The process has been a very creative and enjoyable one and we now look forward to moving on to our pre-application planning discussion with the planning team at Birmingham City Council, and the many other consultations we intend to have with interested parties.”

birminghamculture no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old June 15th, 2005, 12:00 AM   #80
Britannia
Yorkshire Pud
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 225
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Wise words as ever Brit

The Paddington scheme you mention seems to have completely passed me by, but I quite liked the Kings Reach Tower one (though you've probably seen more of it than I have). Given the limitations of recladding as an activity they seemed to make a decent fist of taking it beyond a crude re-wallpapering, turning the bland, shapeless existing form into a tightly coherent and arresting new one with a clear sense of itself as an integrated series of objects - the patches of colour seemed to add useful horizontal relationships to compliment the vertical 'fins'. The actual shade of blue itself looked a bit ropey (trying too hard to distance themselves from the stereotypically Fosteresque, perhaps?), but colours and finishes always end up looking different in real life to renderings anyway. Vortex definitely looked like a badly judged play to the gallery, but their Dartford scheme looks interesting, and relatively understated too. If that's to be their first completed building it'll be interesting to see what they actually deliver.
I've seen quite a lot of King's Reach because I'm working on a scheme next door (and someone else in the office is doing KR, so we've got all the files on the computer!). Don't get me wrong, the low-rise buildings have an intriguing plan that opens up a diagonal pedestrian route through the site, creating permeability in what is currently a very hostile part of Southwark, and the proportions of the tower have unquestionnably been enhanced by the extra height... but I think the cladding is just too dark, and the blue tiles are so randomnly placed that they look wrong, rather than looking joyfully random, which I think Palestra manages (or rather it has an ordered randomness... either way it works). On Palestra, the coloured panels don't draw attention because they work within the overall theme of the building. On King's Reach, they just plain stick out. Maybe the palette is wrong, the contrast too great, I don't know, it just doesn't sit too well with me. If built (and I think approval is likely), I think it'll detract from the cityscape.

Quote:
The thing that excites me about The Cube is that it suggests that MAKE might be trying to combine the broad palette of colours, shapes and materials that Alsop uses with the more formal structured layouts that you get from some of Fosters' higher quality designs (rather than Alsop's wilfully arbitrary expressionism) and that seems like something genuinely new and interesting. You could almost see The Cube as making this centrifugal/centripetal tension explicit - a wildly shaped building barely contained within a flimsy rectilinear cage.
That would be exciting if they can pull it off, and I'd love to see a building that was so colourful but also worked so well as an object and a destination (which is what, after all, it is aiming to be). I just can't use any amount of fancy language to get away from the fact that it looks like a big flat brick! It's huge! I don't see how they'll work in any grace or joy, because whatever they do it'll always have a tendency to look like mutton dressed as lamb. No amount of window dressing or clever architectural trickery can disguise such stark proportions.

But I guess I am prejudicing Make because of their love for colour... the reason being that most examples of coloured panels I can think of look awful. Take the new Home Office on Marsham Street... very well designed and built building, but the coloured panels do nothing more than make it look like a sensible government building trying to be 'trendy'... like a politician trying to dance! It should just have kept to being restrained and classy. The only colourful architecture I really think works belongs to Richard Rogers, but that's because he uses it sparingly and he knows what works. Make don't know yet, so they're trying everything and pushing every boundary because they don't yet have any defined limits, which can be dangerous if a lot of their early projects get built. Most architects get to work out their experimental phases on small projects, but Make are going in right at the deepend, so if they **** up, they **** up big time and we have to live with the consequences!

Quote:
Re: Selfridges - the join to the rest of the Bullring is the crowning glory of Benoy's ineptitude, IMO. A scheme like the Bullring, purposely designed to resemble a series of separate and heterogenous facades, ought by definition to be able to deal with ... another separate and hetrogenous facade (which after all is all that Selfridges is). It really shouldn't have been that hard - they just had to take the join on board as yet another natural and inevitable contrast. Instead they appear to have completely misunderstood the point of their own design strategy by sticking that rectangular barrier between Selfridges and the rest - like a piece of greaseproof paper between slices of cake in a teashop, a completely unnecessary intervention that snatches defeat when victory actually seemed the easier option. Hilarious, but a flaw it's hard to pin on Selfridges itself.
Fair point, but my cardboard point remains valid!

Quote:
Masshouse is definitely shockingly poor (bewilderingly so, given that the same grand project has given rise to the world class City Park Gate proposal on the site next door), but its a symptom of a lack of ambition - letting the developers rely on their in-house architects - rather than an inability to deliver on a high ambition, isn't it?
I don't know. I'll say this and know I'll get shot down, but I truly do believe it... I don't think Birmingham has the knowledge or quality standards that Manchester does. Leeds has a similar problem, as does Sheffield. The current schemes going up in Birmingham, with the exception of Beetham and a couple of other select projects (i.e. the new library and City Park Gate), smack of a city so desperate for regeneration that they'll accept anything. I don't think Birmingham should be in that position... I believe it's relatively economically and culturally prosperous, and the raw ingredients are certainly all there... but the city as an entity just doesn't seem to gel, and as a result the standard of design for new buildings in the city is fairly poor. Manchester, by comparison, has a very clear quality control process, which both architects and developers seem to respect. Whatever it is, it produces quality buildings and regeneration schemes, which Birmingham doesn't. Maybe a question for those with more knoweldge of the city, but I see the same disparity in London boroughs. Even working under the same strategic framework, there is huge divergence in the quality produced within different boroughs. Ambition plays a part, but so possibly do resources and knowledge. Some councils simply lack an appreciation and understanding for the design process, so they're unable to demand high quality. Obviously Birmingham has Brindleyplace to hold up and say 'what about this?', but maybe that's the difference of a conscientious developer... maybe the point is that in Birmingham, if the developer doesn't care, they can get away with it.

Quote:
Re: Hamilton Associates - that's probably the difference between a professional like you and a poncey dilettante like me
Not quite a poncey dilettante mate, you know your stuff! It surprised me to find out that there'd been a general schism when Shuttleworth left, when there was basically a decision to go with him or to go somewhere else. Quite a large contingent went to Hamiltons. Maybe it was an ideological split!
__________________
rulebritannia

Last edited by Britannia; June 15th, 2005 at 12:06 AM.
Britannia no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools

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

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 03:51 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2018, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2018 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

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

tech management by Sysprosium