Elizabeth House Redevelopment | Waterloo | 123m/53m | 29/10 fl | Approved - Page 3

potto · June 30th, 2007, 10:37 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by gothicform

hideous isnt it. one building too many. the sad thing is that york road needs to be fixed which the previous proposal would have addressed.

blimey thats a good point, we even lose out on that!!!!

***wjfox*** · July 1st, 2007, 12:50 AM

Tried to find this scheme on Lambeth's website but it doesn't seem to be there.

Maybe they're ashamed to display it. I suggest everyone e-mails the planning department directly -

lambethplanning@lambeth.gov.uk

This is a prime location - standing over a major transport node, close to the River Thames and just a stone's throw from the Houses of Parliament, the London Eye and various other icons of London. A prominent site like this requires outstanding, world class architecture... not a load of insipid glass boxes. Let's make ourselves heard!

gazzab1990 · July 1st, 2007, 02:15 AM

I love when people refer to stuff as 'cack'

To be honest, I don't really support a skyscraper/scrapers for this site anyway. There's no need to be building them everywhere, and the shell building has always seemed to look great IMO alone, and next to the Eye.

If they have to build a tall building here then I would prefer that it compliment the shell building better, or simply blend into the background which I feel these buildings don't do too badly because of how unremarkable they are, however because of their massive size and stumped height, almost parallel to that of the shell building, they look awful! And if they are to be built I would prefer that they be clad entirely in glass and reflect both the sky, and the shell building.

Either make them a lot shorter - maybe half the size - or decrease each of the individual building's footprints and extend them higher, but keep to the shiny glass design, maybe add a little interest in the crowns and improve the buildings' shapes, but keep them simple, and allow the shell building to remain a focal point along the South bank

***ill tonkso*** · July 1st, 2007, 09:45 AM

They will probably turn out quite Canary Wharfish with the cladding quality. i think these could make for some good skyline supporters.

potto · July 1st, 2007, 03:05 PM

skyline supporters? Think about it most of the 'skyline' will be happening further East on Black friars road. In this immediate area there is a hospital, a huge Grade II County Hall with its new associated blocks, a park, a large station with its tracks and a serveral buildings that wont be demolished surrounding a large road intersection. These need to be able to stand on their own as there wont be a cluster joining them any time soon. It just looks really bad from most angles, especially the wall effect you will get from the Embankment Ugh

london lad · July 2nd, 2007, 03:10 PM

Bit of news fro Eg

The towers were cut back from 36 to 28 , 27 to 22 & the resi tower from 54 to 33 storeys

potto · July 2nd, 2007, 03:32 PM

grrrrr Westminster!

UrbanG · July 2nd, 2007, 03:47 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

These are not iconic enough for such a prominent site. Too bulky, no soar, no sense of place. Vile.

Too bulky, I agree but how many more icons do we need! I'm not offended by this proposal - I'll reserve my judgement until I see the quality and how it improves things at street level , which is what is really needed in this area - active frontages and a dash of colour - from what I can see it is at least an attempt to compliment the surrounding buildings (e.g shell centre) and develop some sort of asthetic consistency- I much prefer this than silly "hey look at me" towers on the bank of the river bank such as the Jeremiah tower (of whatever it's called)

potto · July 2nd, 2007, 04:07 PM

well by iconic I think he meant something that defines the skyline. This is a prime example of how not to build a tall building... a wall cowering behind the Shell tower, embarrassed? Lack of confidence? A display of the ugly truth of economics in architecture?

Who knows...

if we are going to build tall then lets make an attractive inspiring skyline!!!! Every other era managed it, what is wrong with us? It is all about how the top of the building interacts with our view of the city, and blimey does South London desperately need something positive in this aspect! This multi-million scheme is not positive enough! It is merely a reflection of the warped policies of the boring old farts in Westminster who would have been still been boring and a disaster if they had lived in any other major period of Londons life!

Give me LBT, Leadenhall, The Pinnacle and yes even the Jeremiah tower over this shambles any day.

People really need to sort out this inability to resolve the difference between iconic and whacky. How can anyone desire 'a blend in' tower in somewhere like London, a place where towers can not really hide!? Well it looks like that is what we are getting whether we need it or not!

DarJoLe · July 2nd, 2007, 04:24 PM

We need something iconic here because it is a prime location directly by London's famous landmarks - the Palace of Westminster and the London Eye. Plus we need something to detract the eye away from the mistake that is the Shell tower.

Tall buildings by nature in London are iconic whether they like it or not. Because we have so few of them we seem to have some kind of emotional attachment to them.

A collection of tall buildings, a cluster if you must, should have at least one tower that creates a sense of place and a recognisable form on the skyline. I thought this was the reasoning behind the clustering of tall buildings in London? That each should in essence create a village feel easily identifiable on the skyline? I wouldn't mind so much if these were skyline filler that were bulking up a skyline that led up to a taller iconic tower, but these on their own are not a good set of skyscrapers for their location. In fact I don't think I'd support their design at any location in London, they are that bland and safe.

What would be my dream for this site? Well, I like the idea of a group of towers. Three slim, soaring towers that are spaced apart along Elizabeth Road one of which is taller than the London Eye yet is slim enough not to 'block' too much of the view from the top of the Eye. Possibly something that tapers towards the top.

Each of the towers would be distinctly different from each other, yet would feel part of the same family by similar facade details used in different manners across each of them. Their bases would be connected, yet flair out in similar fashion to the Pinnacle, creating a new covered pedestrian centre which would house retail, eateries, covered piazzas and possible a wintergarden with trees and plants, with a direct connection to Waterloo station that would allow easy access to the South Bank and the London Eye.

The design would echo possibly the Palace of Westminster with spires, yet be an abstract modern take on them, more fluidic and organic, yet not particularly curvature in facade. A selection of different glass and cladding shapes would be used, with possibly a stainless steel 'ribbon' outer cladding that winds itself up the tallest building similar to vines on a tree that binds the tower. This ribbon effect would also appear on the other towers, but in a different manner. One of the towers would have slightly tinted glass with possibly a slight amber or gold tinge that appears at dusk to echo the gold in Big Ben.

They would be good neighbours by being as thin and light on the skyline as the London Eye, yet as bold and distinctive as Big Ben. They would show a new design for London, one of inclusivity yet brave and ready for the future, and make Waterloo an easily identifiable 'centre' of gravity for London.

Manuel · July 2nd, 2007, 04:27 PM

Although I'm not a fan of something highly iconic here (London is not lacking tall internationaly recognisable structures in the area), something slightly organic or fluid should complement the eye and the Shell centre.

DarJoLe · July 2nd, 2007, 05:16 PM

jef · July 2nd, 2007, 06:13 PM

I read your dream Darjole.

Then I saw the pictures.

It was a nightmare.

***gothicform*** · July 2nd, 2007, 06:50 PM

i have these images very high res and some more! heh. ill post them up when ive shrunk the damn things.

Smoggie_Si · July 2nd, 2007, 06:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jef

http://www.ft.com/cms/s/d456ff9e-25d...b5df10621.html
Three skyscrapers planned for site next to Waterloo station
By Jim Pickard,Property Correspondent

Published: June 29 2007 03:00 | Last updated: June 29 2007 03:00

Plans for a £1bn scheme featuring three skyscrapers will today be unveiled for a site next to Waterloo station currently occupied by a 1960s eyesore.

Elizabeth House, just to the edge of Waterloo, is a multi-let 1960s office block that vies with the likes of Centerpoint as London's least charming modern building.

Centrepoint rules

potto · July 2nd, 2007, 07:00 PM

although the whole setting of the tower (created with the tower in mind) is a complete PR disaster!

potto · July 2nd, 2007, 07:01 PM

I would also add that I find this new proposal just as charmless as the building along York road!

Joe 2007 · July 2nd, 2007, 07:26 PM

banal boxy dross.

Varenukha · July 2nd, 2007, 07:44 PM

I just clocked the renders on skyscrapernews.com - they look like very, very big cooling towers. Oh no, please do not let these be built - is it too late for there to be a nice park there instead.

BTW - I could not resist remarking on wjfox's new avatar. Goodness me, that really is a super choice!

***wjfox*** · July 2nd, 2007, 08:03 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Varenukha

BTW - I could not resist remarking on wjfox's new avatar. Goodness me, that really is a super choice!

Yep - Rocky rules!

http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=cavFoyYJwPQ
http://uk.youtube.com/watch?v=0efQFeyxtnU

July 1st, 2007, 12:50 AM	#42
*wjfox* Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: L O N D O N Posts: 36,191 Likes (Received): 930	Tried to find this scheme on Lambeth's website but it doesn't seem to be there. Maybe they're ashamed to display it. I suggest everyone e-mails the planning department directly - lambethplanning@lambeth.gov.uk This is a prime location - standing over a major transport node, close to the River Thames and just a stone's throw from the Houses of Parliament, the London Eye and various other icons of London. A prominent site like this requires outstanding, world class architecture... not a load of insipid glass boxes. Let's make ourselves heard! __________________ FutureTimeline.net - a timeline of future history

July 1st, 2007, 09:45 AM	#44
*ill tonkso* Portsmouths Finest, Maybe Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 14,132 Likes (Received): 217	They will probably turn out quite Canary Wharfish with the cladding quality. i think these could make for some good skyline supporters. __________________ Official Skyscrapercity 'Support the Shard at London Bridge' Facebook Group! Ill-Tonkso.co.uk - My Portfolio Website

July 2nd, 2007, 04:07 PM	#49
potto Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 13,503 Likes (Received): 250	well by iconic I think he meant something that defines the skyline. This is a prime example of how not to build a tall building... a wall cowering behind the Shell tower, embarrassed? Lack of confidence? A display of the ugly truth of economics in architecture? Who knows... if we are going to build tall then lets make an attractive inspiring skyline!!!! Every other era managed it, what is wrong with us? It is all about how the top of the building interacts with our view of the city, and blimey does South London desperately need something positive in this aspect! This multi-million scheme is not positive enough! It is merely a reflection of the warped policies of the boring old farts in Westminster who would have been still been boring and a disaster if they had lived in any other major period of Londons life! Give me LBT, Leadenhall, The Pinnacle and yes even the Jeremiah tower over this shambles any day. People really need to sort out this inability to resolve the difference between iconic and whacky. How can anyone desire 'a blend in' tower in somewhere like London, a place where towers can not really hide!? Well it looks like that is what we are getting whether we need it or not! Last edited by potto; July 2nd, 2007 at 04:26 PM.

July 2nd, 2007, 04:24 PM	#50
DarJoLe Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 15,667 Likes (Received): 394	We need something iconic here because it is a prime location directly by London's famous landmarks - the Palace of Westminster and the London Eye. Plus we need something to detract the eye away from the mistake that is the Shell tower. Tall buildings by nature in London are iconic whether they like it or not. Because we have so few of them we seem to have some kind of emotional attachment to them. A collection of tall buildings, a cluster if you must, should have at least one tower that creates a sense of place and a recognisable form on the skyline. I thought this was the reasoning behind the clustering of tall buildings in London? That each should in essence create a village feel easily identifiable on the skyline? I wouldn't mind so much if these were skyline filler that were bulking up a skyline that led up to a taller iconic tower, but these on their own are not a good set of skyscrapers for their location. In fact I don't think I'd support their design at any location in London, they are that bland and safe. What would be my dream for this site? Well, I like the idea of a group of towers. Three slim, soaring towers that are spaced apart along Elizabeth Road one of which is taller than the London Eye yet is slim enough not to 'block' too much of the view from the top of the Eye. Possibly something that tapers towards the top. Each of the towers would be distinctly different from each other, yet would feel part of the same family by similar facade details used in different manners across each of them. Their bases would be connected, yet flair out in similar fashion to the Pinnacle, creating a new covered pedestrian centre which would house retail, eateries, covered piazzas and possible a wintergarden with trees and plants, with a direct connection to Waterloo station that would allow easy access to the South Bank and the London Eye. The design would echo possibly the Palace of Westminster with spires, yet be an abstract modern take on them, more fluidic and organic, yet not particularly curvature in facade. A selection of different glass and cladding shapes would be used, with possibly a stainless steel 'ribbon' outer cladding that winds itself up the tallest building similar to vines on a tree that binds the tower. This ribbon effect would also appear on the other towers, but in a different manner. One of the towers would have slightly tinted glass with possibly a slight amber or gold tinge that appears at dusk to echo the gold in Big Ben. They would be good neighbours by being as thin and light on the skyline as the London Eye, yet as bold and distinctive as Big Ben. They would show a new design for London, one of inclusivity yet brave and ready for the future, and make Waterloo an easily identifiable 'centre' of gravity for London. __________________ "I can quite confidently and with pride say that if everything goes to plan London 2012 will be the best Olympic Games and will surpass Barcelona and Sydney in terms of atmosphere, style and achievement. And not just about the sport. The whole city and its people will come alive and want to be a part of this. It just feels right." DarJoLe, May 19th 2006. Last edited by DarJoLe; July 2nd, 2007 at 04:30 PM.

July 2nd, 2007, 05:16 PM	#52
DarJoLe Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 15,667 Likes (Received): 394	__________________ "I can quite confidently and with pride say that if everything goes to plan London 2012 will be the best Olympic Games and will surpass Barcelona and Sydney in terms of atmosphere, style and achievement. And not just about the sport. The whole city and its people will come alive and want to be a part of this. It just feels right." DarJoLe, May 19th 2006.

July 1st, 2007, 02:15 AM	#43
gazzab1990 SPAMMED Join Date: May 2007 Location: Plymouth, Devon Posts: 2,224 Likes (Received): 2	I love when people refer to stuff as 'cack' To be honest, I don't really support a skyscraper/scrapers for this site anyway. There's no need to be building them everywhere, and the shell building has always seemed to look great IMO alone, and next to the Eye. If they have to build a tall building here then I would prefer that it compliment the shell building better, or simply blend into the background which I feel these buildings don't do too badly because of how unremarkable they are, however because of their massive size and stumped height, almost parallel to that of the shell building, they look awful! And if they are to be built I would prefer that they be clad entirely in glass and reflect both the sky, and the shell building. Either make them a lot shorter - maybe half the size - or decrease each of the individual building's footprints and extend them higher, but keep to the shiny glass design, maybe add a little interest in the crowns and improve the buildings' shapes, but keep them simple, and allow the shell building to remain a focal point along the South bank

July 1st, 2007, 03:05 PM	#45
potto Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 13,503 Likes (Received): 250	skyline supporters? Think about it most of the 'skyline' will be happening further East on Black friars road. In this immediate area there is a hospital, a huge Grade II County Hall with its new associated blocks, a park, a large station with its tracks and a serveral buildings that wont be demolished surrounding a large road intersection. These need to be able to stand on their own as there wont be a cluster joining them any time soon. It just looks really bad from most angles, especially the wall effect you will get from the Embankment Ugh

July 2nd, 2007, 03:10 PM	#46
london lad Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: London Posts: 8,155 Likes (Received): 45	Bit of news fro Eg The towers were cut back from 36 to 28 , 27 to 22 & the resi tower from 54 to 33 storeys

July 2nd, 2007, 03:32 PM	#47
potto Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 13,503 Likes (Received): 250	grrrrr Westminster!

July 2nd, 2007, 04:27 PM	#51
Manuel Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Posts: 9,952 Likes (Received): 2	Although I'm not a fan of something highly iconic here (London is not lacking tall internationaly recognisable structures in the area), something slightly organic or fluid should complement the eye and the Shell centre.

July 2nd, 2007, 06:13 PM	#53
jef Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Brussels/London Posts: 3,362 Likes (Received): 0	I read your dream Darjole. Then I saw the pictures. It was a nightmare.

July 2nd, 2007, 06:50 PM	#54
*gothicform* Bossman Join Date: Jul 2002 Location: not london Posts: 29,207 Likes (Received): 493	i have these images very high res and some more! heh. ill post them up when ive shrunk the damn things.

July 2nd, 2007, 07:00 PM	#56
potto Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 13,503 Likes (Received): 250	although the whole setting of the tower (created with the tower in mind) is a complete PR disaster!

July 2nd, 2007, 07:01 PM	#57
potto Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 13,503 Likes (Received): 250	I would also add that I find this new proposal just as charmless as the building along York road!

July 2nd, 2007, 07:26 PM	#58
Joe 2007 Joe_1978 Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 524 Likes (Received): 0	banal boxy dross.

July 2nd, 2007, 07:44 PM	#59
Varenukha London, UK Join Date: Mar 2006 Posts: 702 Likes (Received): 0	I just clocked the renders on skyscrapernews.com - they look like very, very big cooling towers. Oh no, please do not let these be built - is it too late for there to be a nice park there instead. BTW - I could not resist remarking on wjfox's new avatar. Goodness me, that really is a super choice!

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: