Number 1 Blackfriars | Southwark | 163m | 52 fl | U/C - Page 7

DarJoLe · January 11th, 2007, 10:51 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jimbo

If this fails, so does Wilkinson Eyre and Doon Street.

Not a bad thing. I'm not sure there is a need to have towers in this area of London.

Newcastle Guy · January 11th, 2007, 11:12 PM

Maybe Doon Street, but WE tower, from what we hav seen, looks like it will be amazing if done properly.

jef · January 23rd, 2007, 07:11 PM

2 new official renderings with the correct height (taken from Beetham website):

Gherkin · January 23rd, 2007, 07:21 PM

Is the coloured cladding gone then? And whatever is that object inside the glass at the top?

Newcastle Guy · January 23rd, 2007, 07:25 PM

It looks good in those renders. It looks very futuristic without the coloured cladding. Hopefully it will still go orange in the sun set though

AXISPAW · January 23rd, 2007, 07:27 PM

wow i think they make it look ten times better

Tharpe · January 23rd, 2007, 07:29 PM

its a laser beem to shoot down aliens which would otherwise threaten the buildings of skyscrapers. the UN would say "
skyscrapers are a danger to spaceships!"

jef · January 23rd, 2007, 07:30 PM

It looks much better indeed. It is not my fave but I like it and ... I want to see some action. We know for sure Beetham will build it if they obtain planning permission. They have signed Jumeirah. btw, when is this scheme due to go before the development committee?

mulattokid · January 23rd, 2007, 08:15 PM

Remembering tha renders are like politicians.....its mostly self serving claptrap to get what you want!

It looks a lot better and more acceptable to me.

DarJoLe · January 23rd, 2007, 08:55 PM

Note the random strips of white cladding make a slight appearance. You can see them better on the night shot.

This will be no different to the other Beetham's going up - cheap.

***gothicform*** · January 24th, 2007, 09:58 AM

the object in the top is actually plant machinery for the window cleaning operation.

Gherkin · January 24th, 2007, 11:45 AM

That's interesting. I'd actually prefer it if the top was just an empty glass box though, similar to the gherkin, as this would give anyone at the top a 360 degree view of London.

mulattokid · January 24th, 2007, 12:44 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Gherkin007

That's interesting. I'd actually prefer it if the top was just an empty glass box though, similar to the gherkin, as this would give anyone at the top a 360 degree view of London.

Well I suspect what you can see is just the track for something to run along and clean the windows, just as with the Gherkin, Gherkin007...but whats the alternative...increasingly dirty windows that you cant see out of anyway

london lad · January 24th, 2007, 01:11 PM

Don't forget though that top part will also be a viewing gallery for the public.

NothingBetterToDo · January 24th, 2007, 02:26 PM

Oh yes, it looks a lot better in those renderings - but they fail to show the extent of its large backside. It does look nicer without the excessively coloured cladding though

I have gone from complete indifference to this project to mild interest - looking forward to seeing some more renders

Mr Bricks · January 24th, 2007, 06:46 PM

I don´t know what to say about Beetham. But I do hope this doesn´t get
built before the city proposals because its controversial design might get people to change their mind about tall buildings. The situation already seems to be a little tense with the Broadgate tower going up directly behind St Paul´s.

Maybe I´m wrong

Skid-Mark · January 24th, 2007, 07:27 PM

Personally i think this now looks woeful, amazing what a height reduction can do, despite it's fairly significant height. Lost all it's soar, i'm actually gutted. The original i loved (i know many disagree) but this i think is feeble.

henry · January 24th, 2007, 08:34 PM

I was resolutely against the redesign of this tower. At first sight I felt the shortened height had managed to reduced the buildings grace while simultaneously failing to solve the flaws in the original desgin.
But with a bit of time to look at it as a seperate building in it's own right I've come to see it as one, which despite some flaws, is of a far higher design standard to most things that have been built along the river in the last 50 or so years. It's not quite at the level we might expect from Rogers, Grimshaw, Gehry and the other top names, but it certainly represents a genuine and, I think mostly succesful, attempt to respone to the prominent location by designing a striking and memorably building.
I say build it.

aquablue · January 24th, 2007, 08:46 PM

Sorry, but why in world does it take sooo long to get permission in London????
This has been going on for ages now, come on folks, lets get it together here.

eXSBass · January 24th, 2007, 09:14 PM

I like this tower now that it's had it's height reduced. It looks more "sensible".

View Poll Results: What's your opinion of this building?
Love it! Superb design, perfect height and location.	191	29.25%
Like it. Good design, and the height seems reasonable for this location.	237	36.29%
Good design, but it needs to be taller.	108	16.54%
Good design, but it needs to be shorter.	23	3.52%
Hate it! Awful design, unsuitable height and location.	94	14.40%
Voters: 653. You may not vote on this poll

January 23rd, 2007, 07:29 PM	#127
Tharpe Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Minas Tirith Posts: 301 Likes (Received): 0	its a laser beem to shoot down aliens which would otherwise threaten the buildings of skyscrapers. the UN would say " skyscrapers are a danger to spaceships!" __________________ selvom du ikke tror det Gud elsker dig og stadig bryder sig om dig, han ønsker at være i forhold med dig og dele dit liv med glæde, hvis du vil lade ham.

January 23rd, 2007, 08:15 PM	#129
mulattokid BLAND Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: London Posts: 8,427 Likes (Received): 104	Remembering tha renders are like politicians.....its mostly self serving claptrap to get what you want! It looks a lot better and more acceptable to me. __________________ Quote: "Everything in life is our fault...but that's not our fault" (By a friend of Quentin Crisp) www.jclodge.com (my singer sisters site) The headlines read: 'another footballer is charged with sexual miscontuct'! Is it pure coincidence that a mans Scrotum resembles a brain - requisite with both hemispheres, and its truncated spinal cord - always in search of sensation? (Mark Joseph 2008)

January 24th, 2007, 02:26 PM	#135
NothingBetterToDo Better To Do Nothing Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 10,536 Likes (Received): 1	Oh yes, it looks a lot better in those renderings - but they fail to show the extent of its large backside. It does look nicer without the excessively coloured cladding though I have gone from complete indifference to this project to mild interest - looking forward to seeing some more renders __________________ My Pictures: London - Amsterdam - Copenhagen - Berlin - Oslo - Bergen - Prague - Dublin

January 24th, 2007, 06:46 PM	#136
Mr Bricks Registered User Join Date: May 2005 Location: Helsinki Posts: 5,248 Likes (Received): 28	I don´t know what to say about Beetham. But I do hope this doesn´t get built before the city proposals because its controversial design might get people to change their mind about tall buildings. The situation already seems to be a little tense with the Broadgate tower going up directly behind St Paul´s. Maybe I´m wrong __________________ Helsinki http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...516&highlight=

January 11th, 2007, 11:12 PM	#122
Newcastle Guy Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 8,957 Likes (Received): 18	Maybe Doon Street, but WE tower, from what we hav seen, looks like it will be amazing if done properly.

January 23rd, 2007, 07:11 PM	#123
jef Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Brussels/London Posts: 3,362 Likes (Received): 0	2 new official renderings with the correct height (taken from Beetham website):

January 23rd, 2007, 07:21 PM	#124
Gherkin actual gherkin Join Date: May 2005 Location: Leeds Posts: 13,746 Likes (Received): 161	Is the coloured cladding gone then? And whatever is that object inside the glass at the top?

January 23rd, 2007, 07:25 PM	#125
Newcastle Guy Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 8,957 Likes (Received): 18	It looks good in those renders. It looks very futuristic without the coloured cladding. Hopefully it will still go orange in the sun set though

January 23rd, 2007, 07:27 PM	#126
AXISPAW Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Aberdeen Posts: 835 Likes (Received): 5	wow i think they make it look ten times better

January 23rd, 2007, 07:30 PM	#128
jef Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Brussels/London Posts: 3,362 Likes (Received): 0	It looks much better indeed. It is not my fave but I like it and ... I want to see some action. We know for sure Beetham will build it if they obtain planning permission. They have signed Jumeirah. btw, when is this scheme due to go before the development committee?

January 23rd, 2007, 08:55 PM	#130
DarJoLe Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 15,675 Likes (Received): 400	Note the random strips of white cladding make a slight appearance. You can see them better on the night shot. This will be no different to the other Beetham's going up - cheap.

January 24th, 2007, 09:58 AM	#131
*gothicform* Bossman Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: not london Posts: 29,238 Likes (Received): 505	the object in the top is actually plant machinery for the window cleaning operation.

January 24th, 2007, 11:45 AM	#132
Gherkin actual gherkin Join Date: May 2005 Location: Leeds Posts: 13,746 Likes (Received): 161	That's interesting. I'd actually prefer it if the top was just an empty glass box though, similar to the gherkin, as this would give anyone at the top a 360 degree view of London.

January 24th, 2007, 01:11 PM	#134
london lad Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: London Posts: 8,156 Likes (Received): 45	Don't forget though that top part will also be a viewing gallery for the public.

January 24th, 2007, 08:34 PM	#138
henry Registered User Join Date: Apr 2006 Location: London Posts: 566 Likes (Received): 0	I was resolutely against the redesign of this tower. At first sight I felt the shortened height had managed to reduced the buildings grace while simultaneously failing to solve the flaws in the original desgin. But with a bit of time to look at it as a seperate building in it's own right I've come to see it as one, which despite some flaws, is of a far higher design standard to most things that have been built along the river in the last 50 or so years. It's not quite at the level we might expect from Rogers, Grimshaw, Gehry and the other top names, but it certainly represents a genuine and, I think mostly succesful, attempt to respone to the prominent location by designing a striking and memorably building. I say build it.

January 24th, 2007, 08:46 PM	#139
aquablue Advocate of high design Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 1,539 Likes (Received): 15	Sorry, but why in world does it take sooo long to get permission in London???? This has been going on for ages now, come on folks, lets get it together here.

January 24th, 2007, 09:14 PM	#140
eXSBass Tea. Earl grey. Hot. Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire Posts: 2,526 Likes (Received): 25	I like this tower now that it's had it's height reduced. It looks more "sensible". __________________ The world is my oyster.

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