Bloomberg Place | City of London | 41m | 10fl | U/C

[jimbo]

Originally Posted by gothicform

how did you guyys find it. we spent half an hour looking for that fucking exhibition, the people at legal and general didnt know where it was and everyone else gave us directions that just made us walk around and round the building. waste of fucking time.
potto, jimbo, can i loot your pics please?

it wasn't the most evident, just on the little parade of shops called Budge Row off Cannon Street, but we found it without too much of a hassle.

Feel free to use my pics, though Pottos are much better!

Glad people are coming round to this a little. Its that whole thing about jumping to conclusions and making huge assumptions based on one grainy render scanned from a newspaper. Compare it to the quality of design and presentation made at these sort of events and you get a much better perspective from which to make an informed decision.

Whilst I see all the merits, I still can't make my mind up. Just the organic shape seems strange and out of context. But them in terms of the towers proposed for London, do we have a context anymore. Fruitbasket here we come.

[gothicform]

thanks jimbo but i think ill stick with pottos for now as ive already downloaded them as they are bigger. im with you, i can see the merits of the scheme but im very unsure of whether its "right" or not. this is a question of personal aesthetics. my main issue is the tall building that looks i suppose like a futuristic hi-fi speaker... from the front im not sure it works.

[Smoggie_Si]

I've had some time to make up my mind since seeing the exhibition and like it very much. I think the opening up of public realm and the restoration of the St Pauls sightlines will have a very positive effect on this part of the city, plus it looks very funky and iconic.

The architect that Jimbo and myself were talking too also mentioned a river of light in the basement tracing the route of one of Londons lost rivers! Nice attention to historic detail.

[gothicform]

the walbrook runs under the site doesnt it?

[chest]

I absolutely hate it. I think it is an inelegant, ugly mass. The 'clouds' concept is almost farcical, they look like Cubist bonnets...grotesque nonsense and absurd. I can barely form words to describe how poor the scheme looks - it has an overbearing oppressive feel, an unformed mass, like the beginning of a unfinished sculpture when the artist has just begun to chip away at the block. From some angles it has the appearance of some kind of alien headquarters...its creepy.
I hope its thrown out on its ear, and something that simply isn't ugly replaces it.

[DarJoLe]

Originally Posted by chest

it has an overbearing oppressive feel, an unformed mass, like the beginning of a unfinished sculpture when the artist has just begun to chip away at the block. From some angles it has the appearance of some kind of alien headquarters...its creepy.

That's exactly why I like it.

Why can't architecture push the boundaries just as art, fashion, music and film do?

If anything I'd love to see it taller to create more open space on the pavements, but apart from that I love it. It's like a stone mountain obelisk rising out of the flat skyline of Cannon Street, an alien edifice that has arisen out of the ground, warped out of shape and cracked open to reveal the ruins of the Temple below - and if they get this 'shimmering' cladding correct, it will look amazing.

[DarJoLe]

Originally Posted by gothicform

the walbrook runs under the site doesnt it?

Yes, down the eastern side (there's a road called Walbrook which was created when it was filled in). The river is still there underground, it floods some of the buildings it runs under after heavy rain.

The Temple was built on its banks in 3AD.

[gothicform]

the temple cant have been built in 3ad. britain was not under roman occupation then.
one thing that hasnt been mentioned in this thread is nouvel and his cladding ideas. tour sans fin was a great example of this, the guy likes messing with transparency and transuclency.

[DarJoLe]

Temple Of Mithras

[Luke]

Had a long chat with one of the chaps working there. He said that the City of London will make their planning decision in February 2007. Vacant possession of the site will be late 2007 and demolition will begin shortly after.

A pre-let of around 25% will be sought before construction of any individual building and a construction timetable of three years is about right if all the buildings are built at once. He said an alternative timetable in which the buildings are built in phases could take up to six years with the foundations of all four buildings plus the complete construction of the tower building the first phase. The other three would then be built as tenants were lined up.

The chap said that negotiations were continuing with the Mayors office about the buildings energy credentials since the guidelines have recently changed ruling that all new buildings should have 20% energy sustainability and Walbrook Square was submitted when 10% was the rule (Walbrook Square has slightly more than 10% but not close to 20%).

The solar panals only contribute 2% of the projects actual energy needs with most of the rest of the green credentials coming from water cooling bore holes.

[chest]

Originally Posted by chest:
'it has an overbearing oppressive feel, an unformed mass, like the beginning of a unfinished sculpture when the artist has just begun to chip away at the block. From some angles it has the appearance of some kind of alien headquarters...its creepy.'

Originally Posted by DarJoLe:
'That's exactly why I like it.
Why can't architecture push the boundaries just as art, fashion, music and film do?'



I don't believe it's pushing any boundaries, its ugly and to be honest ' a bit rubbish'.

Do you know what I really long for - a beautiful, elegant well designed skyscraper that conjurs up some of the glamour and excitement that skyscrapers captured in early 1930's New York - Swiss Re managed it

but this....
like a much taller building that's melted
or Darth Vaders bashed in head plonked on a plinth...

[Madman]

I dont know, i dont think it would be bad at all if it weren't for that bloody lump infront of it that blocks the towers transition to the ground.

[wjfox]

View of the site from Tower 42:

[ferge]

is that a load of people having a party on top of poultry building?? lol

[potto]

its a popular bar, open to the public, usually very busy though

[wjfox]

[Rigadon]

I like it

[maggie]

from http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com...&upload_id=375

Foster and Partners


A unique architectural partnership between the practices of Norman Foster and Jean Nouvel
Legal & General have submitted plans for a striking new office and retail development, to be known as ‘Walbrook Square’ in the heart of London. Designed by Atelier Foster Nouvel, The project incorporates approximately 1 million sq ft net floorspace on the 3.7 acre site, with 95,000 sq ft of retail and restaurant floorspace and 875,000 sq ft of office space and will be composed of four buildings each with their own distinct character but which together read as a cluster. The development is centred on the creation of a new public square and new streets based on historic routes through the site, which will allow increased public access. Also incorporated into Walbrook Square will be a publicly accessible exhibition space to house remains of the Roman Temple of Mithras.

[wjfox]

Took these pics of the site today.

I really can't wait to see this demolished -


[IMG]http://i2.************/1zqv97o.jpg[/IMG]

[Skid-Mark]

That is truly hidious. Southend has a cluster of those.