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 > Birmingham Metro Area

Birmingham Metro Area For Birmingham, Wolverhampton and the West Midlands.



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 January 24th, 2007, 12:20 PM   #81
FLD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Mathieu View Post
To compare these average oldie worldy buildings with The Tower of Pisa, St Pauls, Notre Dame is ridiculous. The Town Hall, The Council House and Victoria and Chamberlain Squares make one of the most wonderful City Centres anywhere. Whatever is planned for Paradise Circus must complement this cluster and not detract from it. What is so wonderful about Birmingham is that you have so many places you can have skyscrapers a luxury 99% of cities don't have. Even when London had the GLC Building it was forgettable as a building as is the present one. If you wish to compare The Council House to a building in France lets go to Lyon the 2nd City and the Hôtel de Ville there is no great shakes with just a square in front quite ordinary really.
I totally agree with you, Mathieu. Towers on the Paradise site would be so controversial that it would delay the development of the area for many years to come. The people of Birmingham would not allow 30 or 40 storey towers on this site to happen, it is too close to Birmingham's historic heart & it's most important historical buildings (whatever Sim would have you believe!)

I really want real skyscrapers for Birmingham, but this isn't the place for them ... Arena Central is close to the historic heart of the city, & I'm amazed this ever got passed the planning stage, if Alpha Tower had never been built in the early 1970's, I doubt a tower on the Arena Central site would have ever been considered. This is only my opinion though!
FLD no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old January 24th, 2007, 12:23 PM   #82
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Is Mathieu and FLD the same person?

Fld you talk absolute nonsense. Natwest Tower?
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 12:28 PM   #83
FLD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimLim View Post
Is Mathieu and FLD the same person?

Fld you talk absolute nonsense. Natwest Tower?
No we are not the same person, think Mathieu is in Paris & I'm in Cheltenham!

Not getting into a slanging match with you Sim, as ultimately we want the same for Birmingham ... just don't agree on the same sites for tall buildings.

What about the NatWest Tower? In my opinion, this should never have been built here in the first place, & a new tower would be a mistake here .... only my opinion though!
FLD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 12:35 PM   #84
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

What part of this dont you get FLD. The tower sites in no way what so ever affect these important historical buildings. You are arguing that the whole scheme should resist skyscrapers because if proposed into a scheme they COULD and thats the main word do what exactly?

Natwest tower has done harm to the Council house? I dont think so. A new tower would effectively add to its prominance and oproduce a square of world wide notice.

Preservation is fine. Restricting building because it might be in the sightline for 8 or 9 people taking photgraphs. Na Huh.
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 12:40 PM   #85
FLD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 0

FLD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 12:42 PM   #86
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Why bang your head. Answer the question's aimed at you. You just dont understand the angles and significance of these sites.
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 12:49 PM   #87
FLD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimLim View Post
Why bang your head. Answer the question's aimed at you. You just dont understand the angles and significance of these sites.
Right Sim, I've put a plaster on my forehead, & I've stopped laughing now.

I've just done a quick poll of foreign tourists to London (you can apply the percentages to Birmingham);

The tourists were asked if they were likely to be taking photographs of tall office buildings in the city;

99 said "NO" they wouldn't be, & 1 said "YES" he would be ....... think we could be in the minority Sim, skyscrapers have a limited appeal to 99% of the population, a bit like train spotting!


Btw, which question would you like me to 'seriously' answer first??
FLD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:02 PM   #88
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Thats quite comical. Who said people would prefer to take pictures of tall office towers then historical buildings? I know I didnt. I would like to see this poll however

I said tall towers would not prevent tourists from taking pictures of these. One a skyscraper at PC would in no way be in sight of a straight on image of the council house nor would a tall at Natwest.

You seem to have gone well of scope here.

Tourists would NOT MIND towers intereferring with these views. THEY ARE'NT WORLD FAMOUS. Brummies might. but many Brummies might also appreciate them. £1,000,000,000 of investment into the city, 5,000+ new jobs well worth preventing major redevelopment.

P.S I personally dont think you have the ability to answer any question "seriously" which is why I will let you off.
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:10 PM   #89
FLD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 0

No, no, no Sim, don't let me off ..... which question(s) do you want me to answer!!

I go to many cities around the world that aren't particularly famous & have buildings in them that aren't particularly famous in a world wide sense, but those buildings in those cities are very important to THAT city, & for you to 'rubbish' the buildings in the Victoria Square area of Birmingham, and suggest that they are not important to the people of Birmingham makes me think that you don't really care about the city as a 'whole', & I'd go as far to suggest that I doubt you are a true Brummie to even suggest such things.

..... now, which question would you like me to answer first?
FLD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:46 PM   #90
woodhousen
Moderator
 
woodhousen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Leeds/Birmingham, UK
Posts: 11,474
Likes (Received): 134

oi oi oi, stop this argument, its getting a little too in depth....

i agree this is goign to be a touchy subject and this site is going to be an intersting one to watch. however, i think both of you are going a little too extreme in your points

Simlim, too many tall buildings around hidtoric areas would not be good. yes it doesnt actually physically do anyting to be the building, but the effects of over shadowing and wind effects may well change the characher of victoria square from a placve u want to be to a place you wouldnt!

FLD, however, you are fogetting that design can play a major part and can compliment historic areas. highrise modern development in paradise circus can bring investment to the area (the grand hotel maybe) and and although tower should be of a high quality design and be placed sympathetically, it is not enough to say that tall buildings shouldnt be built in a location that ISNT a conservation area because its near older historic buildings!
__________________
Simply BIRMINGHAM
woodhousen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:53 PM   #91
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

You just dont listen. Im not rubbishing these buildings, im being realistic. They are not tourist hotspots. They do not attract world-wide attention, they are not world heritage sites. Building towers 300m away will not affect the natural born brummie looking at these day to day infact towers over 100m you would struggle to even see standing underneath the council house.

Quote:
and suggest that they are not important to the people of Birmingham makes me think that you don't really care about the city as a 'whole', & I'd go as far to suggest that I doubt you are a true Brummie to even suggest such things.
You like to cut corners dont you to make yourself sound better. I said as with all things, Some Brummies would disaprove of these towers but others would welcome them.

Personally I find you very obnoxious. I have been on these forums for over 8 years, found my way into construction because of this site and the old one. You are a relative newcomer. Im born and bred Brummie. I care what happens but realistically, for a city to progress you must sacrifice sightlines. You wont, which is the reason cities stall.

The counter balance is they arent world famous they dont attract people to the city as St Pauls etc does for London, where as billions of pounds of investment the creation of thousands of jobs is a much better and straight forward option.

Quote:
Originally Posted by simlim
What part of this dont you get FLD. The tower sites in no way what so ever affect these important historical buildings. You are arguing that the whole scheme should resist skyscrapers because if proposed into a scheme they COULD and thats the main word do what exactly?
This one please.
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:55 PM   #92
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodhousen View Post
oi oi oi, stop this argument, its getting a little too in depth....

i agree this is goign to be a touchy subject and this site is going to be an intersting one to watch. however, i think both of you are going a little too extreme in your points

Simlim, too many tall buildings around hidtoric areas would not be good. yes it doesnt actually physically do anyting to be the building, but the effects of over shadowing and wind effects may well change the characher of victoria square from a placve u want to be to a place you wouldnt!

FLD, however, you are fogetting that design can play a major part and can compliment historic areas. highrise modern development in paradise circus can bring investment to the area (the grand hotel maybe) and and although tower should be of a high quality design and be placed sympathetically, it is not enough to say that tall buildings shouldnt be built in a location that ISNT a conservation area because its near older historic buildings!

Overshadowing as said before is a bigger worry at Arena Central then the tower sites at PC. Any towers built would also reduce, even by the smallest fraction the intensity of wind reaching the square.
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 01:58 PM   #93
woodhousen
Moderator
 
woodhousen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Leeds/Birmingham, UK
Posts: 11,474
Likes (Received): 134

anyway here is my proposal for the area that should compliment both views

from south to north
Tower 1 = 25 floors/100m office
Tower 2 = 42 floors/128m residential
Tower 3 = 36 floors/108m Residential











right, here are the kety features.

1) Tower location

placing the tallest towers either to the north of the site and/or shorter tower to the extreme southwest of the site, this reduces any over shadow in victoria sq. although T1 shadow does impeed into Victoria Sq, this is not much more than the existing Alpha Tower and will be outdone bu a tower of 140m+ on the AC site... therefore not having/adding any more overshodowing than existing proposals

2) Flows of people

The removal of the central library allows a wide plaza linking chamberlian sq and centenary sq lined with 3/4 storey buildings allowing a natural passage of people through a light and open plaza with streams and lined by cafe's and shops making paradise a destination instead of a thoroughfare/

3) Open Space

As well as extending chamberlain sq, the creation of 3 new squares will also be built. one of these will be directly opposite the new refurbished town hall making it a focal point with its own square, also grass surounded by shops and cafes.

IMHO, none of the towers are too tall here as at the highest they are 128m. these are tall and promendant enough to make an impact on the skyline and to make a dromatic entrance to the city from jewelry qtr and suffolk st queensway without having a dretrimantal effect on the historic environment whilst also making focal points of the town hall!

thoughts????
__________________
Simply BIRMINGHAM
woodhousen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 02:00 PM   #94
FLD
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Posts: 2,726
Likes (Received): 0

I'm sorry, but I don't actually understand the question ..... I think we should leave it Sim, & beg to differ, & if you were ever to meet me you'd soon realise I am one of the least "obnoxious" people you could ever wish to meet.

Can we start afresh?
FLD no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 02:08 PM   #95
Biosonic
Second Citizen
 
Biosonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 14,559
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by SimLim View Post
Overshadowing as said before is a bigger worry at Arena Central then the tower sites at PC. Any towers built would also reduce, even by the smallest fraction the intensity of wind reaching the square.
Arena Square Tower would be due west of the Town Hall, so surely the only time it would ever overshadow would be just before sunset?
__________________
Birmingham.Brilliance
Biosonic no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 02:15 PM   #96
Biosonic
Second Citizen
 
Biosonic's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jun 2005
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 14,559
Likes (Received): 113

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodhousen View Post
anyway here is my proposal for the area that should compliment both views

from south to north
Tower 1 = 25 floors/100m office
Tower 2 = 42 floors/128m residential
Tower 3 = 36 floors/108m Residential


Here's my thoughts Woody.

1) thanks for the effort
2) I like the 2 towers toward Summer Row. IMO the road between them should be rerouted, maybe past the furthest tower, as there will be a large flow of pedestrians from such tall buildings, and it would aid traffic flow to have them connected to the pedestrianised area (most people would head back into town).
3) Not keen on the positioning of the tower behind the Town Hall - I think it is too close. Looking up New St you would see the Town Hall, with Alpha Tower and Arena Central off to the left. This would have the tower pretty much behind the Town Hall and would also overshadow Alpha for part of the day.

In terms of Broad St sightlines, it would be better to have the tower the next block along, but this would place the tower even more central to the Town Hall.

My suggestion would be to either build a tower where Snobs is, another one in Arena Central, or where the car park is behind Baskerville House.

Am I right in thinking you have just designed us a new library in place of the car park?
__________________
Birmingham.Brilliance
Biosonic no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 02:28 PM   #97
van heckler
Registered User
 
van heckler's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2006
Location: Wolverhampton/Birmingham
Posts: 2,817
Likes (Received): 84

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biosonic View Post
Arena Square Tower would be due west of the Town Hall, so surely the only time it would ever overshadow would be just before sunset?
That's true. Looking at my SketchUp model with the shadows on, in the summer months, March through to September, shadows won't even be an issue with Arena Central. It's when you go from October to February that shadows will be cast over the Council House, although only late in the afternoon when it's dark anyway. I don't even think a 130m tower at Paradise Circus would cast a shadow over the historic buildings at any point of the year when the sun is actually out.
van heckler no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 02:38 PM   #98
woodhousen
Moderator
 
woodhousen's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: Leeds/Birmingham, UK
Posts: 11,474
Likes (Received): 134

Quote:
Originally Posted by Biosonic View Post
Here's my thoughts Woody.

1) thanks for the effort
2) I like the 2 towers toward Summer Row. IMO the road between them should be rerouted, maybe past the furthest tower, as there will be a large flow of pedestrians from such tall buildings, and it would aid traffic flow to have them connected to the pedestrianised area (most people would head back into town).
3) Not keen on the positioning of the tower behind the Town Hall - I think it is too close. Looking up New St you would see the Town Hall, with Alpha Tower and Arena Central off to the left. This would have the tower pretty much behind the Town Hall and would also overshadow Alpha for part of the day.

In terms of Broad St sightlines, it would be better to have the tower the next block along, but this would place the tower even more central to the Town Hall.

My suggestion would be to either build a tower where Snobs is, another one in Arena Central, or where the car park is behind Baskerville House.

Am I right in thinking you have just designed us a new library in place of the car park?

wow, im well chuffed with those comments, nice to know that generally what ive learned about urban design is showing...

well here is my comments.

there is a number for reasons for me placing the tower in this position.

1) i have always loved the idea of having a tower over the top of the queensway as i think this would be an amazing location for a tower and make a massive impact on cars travelling along the suffolk st queeensway.

2) i did realise that this tower would be over shoadowed by alpha tower from about 1:30-4:00, but alphas towers leep aspect from that view (the south) means that shadowing isnt much of an issue. also, the reaon i have put it to office use is because of the overshadowing which is very rarely an issue with office use (usualy on residential use-right to light etc)

3) the reason for the corner is that it allows light up the two passages bassing fromt he tower whilst also being a focal point when you look down them and also letting light into the open plazas. having the tower in line with other buildings also means that the closer you get to the town hall, the less overbareing it bcomes instead of it being at the end of the passageways/plazas.

4) i wanted towers at either end of the site to try and make the site a more "parting the red see" effect and attract the flow of people from ICC/Cent sq to Chamberlain Sq.... focusing high rises only towards the north of the site woudl only focus attaction to that end, this way attention is focused in the middle to the site between the two towers towards our lovely art gallery/town hall and council house

and in terms of the raods....didnt realy think about how they would work, all i know is i want to get rid of the road between the town hall and paradise forum! so you can have that bio...

and the library, funny you said that, the triangular/rounded one next to thye council house was meantt o be a new library, similar in design to the block to the right of the council house now "(the starbucks building)

__________________
Simply BIRMINGHAM
woodhousen no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 03:07 PM   #99
SimLim
Guest
 
Posts: n/a
Likes (Received):

Bit busy at the moment, but I think you've done some great work there Woody. However, I think something like an arch showing the entrance from CS to VS would be something very special.
  Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2007, 07:34 PM   #100
Braidy
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Birmingham
Posts: 158
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by woodhousen View Post
and in terms of the raods....didnt realy think about how they would work, all i know is i want to get rid of the road between the town hall and paradise forum! so you can have that bio...
Oh, boy, that would be great but how would it work?

It would be wonderful imho to give the Town Hall some space for people to really appreciate it from all angles but without that race track / car park (at rush hour) below PC how would the traffic flow through B'ham?
Braidy 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



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