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

[jimbo]

Originally Posted by Jack Rabbit Slim

Brief report from Skyscrapernews.con:

2006-06-06 > Walbrook Square London Exhibition

The exhibition for the public to oogle at the new plans by Norman Foster and Jean Nouvel for Walbrook Square in the City of London will be held at Bucklersbury House, the building it is set to replace, on the 22nd and 23rd of June from 10am to 4pm.
On show will be a number of images plus models and other schematics that should give a revealing view of just what this project makes up. Welcomed warmly by some as blazingly futuristic and hideously OTT by others, it should help those in neither camp to make up their minds about the pros and cons of the scheme as well as give design enthusiasts a rare look into the teamwork of two of the world’s most famous architects.
Entry to the exhibition is free and the nearest station is Cannon Street, only 2 minutes walk away.

............

So Londoners, entry is free, I expect to see photos on this thread from all the people who went!

I shall be popping out of the office at lunchtime and wandering along to take a peak. If its like the Beetham and Bishopsgates Tower exhibitions you are allowed to take photos, so will try and see if I can work my magic.

this is one of the few schemes that seems so initially off the wall I'm not sure what to expect at the display. I think an open mind is required. Hate to think what the Evening Standard will write if they send a correspondent.

[Zenith]

Anybody taken a look ?

[wjfox]

No, because it doesn't start until tomorrow.

[gothicform]

anyone know where in bucklersbury house it is??? its a big place

[JGG]

The easiest way to get there is from Cannon street. Their exhibition space is in a small alleyway inside the complex, next to the Tanning Shop. The entrance to the alleyway is opposite to Alpha Bank on Cannon Street (just west of the train station).

My first reaction:

Pros

- Fantastic architecture; something really new and daring. It looks much better than on the few renders we have seen.
- New square, and a new street (albeit very narrow) cutting through the site
- Entrance to Bank Tube station from the site
- A lot of green on balconies and the roofs of the plinths
- High quality cladding
- They have the planning application on site. It contains all possible views and in general they are better than what I expected.
- The biggest Eyesore of London disappears
- Not too many entry lobbies but a lot of retail space (this seems to be the new thing to get something through the planning department of the City of London)
- The Mitras temple gets relocated but I am not sure whether it really is a huge improvement.

Contras:

- They are massively encroaching on the pavements. A lot of the current buildings are set back from the pavements
- The open space decreases. Even if they make a square, the open space on the site will still be considerably less than what is there today.
- They argue the plinth matches the height of the surrounding buildings. This is true for the 1 Poultry Building opposite on Queen Victoria street, but not for the other streets. I think with the narrowed pavement and the very high plinth Cannon street will have to be renamed Canyon street.
- The clouds are not curveous, they are in fact quite boxy, to me they look more like something coming from a Flinstones set than clouds.
- The square will get a lot of overhang from one of the clouds, I am not sure this is going to be a very pleasant square
- In general the new buildings are much higher than what is there today.
- Rather than integrating the nice neo-classical London Commerce Chambers building on the corner of Cannon and Queen Street, they are demolishing it
- Some trees get lost

I think if they would make the clouds more curveous (and thereby decrease the height of the tallest cloud), reduce the plinth heights to match the building height of each street (rather than picking out the highest point) and set back the buildings a little more from the street, I would be convinced. Right now I am not – despite the fact the architects have come up with something really fantastic. It is clear Legal and General have pushed back considerably on the architects.

I have not taken pictures because I still do not know how to download on this site. Could someone please tell me how to do this?

[Skid-Mark]

sign up to www.imageshack.us once thats done you can upload (they host it) and then under the tab MY IMAGES you can select the corosponding code, which is something lik [img]##############[img/] it'll have forums next to the box. just copy and paste the link in a post here (including the [img/]'s) and they'll show up.

[JGG]

Thank you!

[potto]

A fair analysis, I think with something that isnt a cultural building or private fancy you always get the feeling of the client overpowering the architect rather than the other way around. Having said that the pros definitely shine through.

Thought this was a rather fab image, displayed at the exhibition

[DarJoLe]

That is the most unprofessional professional rendering I have ever seen on the city. Where to begin!

[potto]

Was particularly interested in the relocation of the Mithras temple

the existing location is on a raised plinth on the other side of the site from its original location:



The New Location will be in Walbrook Sq, shown here, this is just around the corner from Bank & Mansion House,





The square will be surrounded by cafes and bars



The temple will be restored to its original level, with access via a glass canopy in the square. they used a pull out drawer to demonstrate this

[Newcastle Guy]

That makes Bishopsgate look tiny! It is the same height as Leadenhall on there!

[DarJoLe]

Minerva, Bishopsgate, 122 Leadenhall and Willis are all in the wrong postion.

[potto]

o yeah! ha in the excitement didnt notice

Here is a view from Bank, Mansion house

[Newcastle Guy]

And they have somehow mangaed to make it look very dull, Leadenhall, Heron and the Shard especially.

[wjfox]

Looks weird...

[DarJoLe]

The base is typically Foster - the usual encroachment overhang on the pavement, dull glass clad box, cheap bland detailing. The Nouvel bit is more interesting but this idea of the towers being 'clouds' on the skyline is bullshit.

To be honest it's not as visionary as I thought it was. And with Nouvel's One New Change listerally across the road I think this might be a bit overkill.

[Skid-Mark]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

Minerva, Bishopsgate, 122 Leadenhall and Willis are all in the wrong postion.

Yeah bishopsgate looks crud in that, but look at the quality of finish on heron and shard, very realistic. Shame they researchers didn't do as good a job as the renderers'.

As for the project, hmmm, still don't like the port hole windows.

[Jamandell (d69)]

Hmm, I don't hate this now as much as I did, and seeing that render shows that it won't have as big as an impact on the skyline as I had feared...I'm still not sure about it overall though.

[GazKinz]

Originally Posted by JGG

Rather than integrating the nice neo-classical London Commerce Chambers building on the corner of Cannon and Queen Street, they are demolishing it

If you are talking about the building circled in red in the picture below then I will not be supporting this project for that reason alone. London has had enough of it's classical architecture vandalished, why haven't they learnt? There are enough sites all around London with really drossy and boring 60s, 70s and 80s buildings ripe for redevelopment without us having to demolish any fine classical buildings.



In general it really doesn't seem all that good. It's far too bulky, the lower part of the building is too boxy and modernist looking, as well as that the lower part of the buildings in no way relate to the top and the square is tiny.
On a plus note, I still like the general shape of the tower, although it could do with being a fair bit slimer and taller. I had high hopes for this and I really dig the idea of something very futuristic and different on this site, this propsal has definately fallen short for me.

[Eastender]

I like the lowrise part of walbrook square (not so much that weird addition on top of it though). I'm also not sure about the tower element. it's too funky for my taste. and it doesn't work well with the rest of the development (or the area). I'm glad it won't stick out too much. it's barely visible...