LONDON | Walbrook Square | 107m | 22 fl | Prep

[wjfox]

What does everyone think of this?



Walbrook Square
The City of London

Height: 107m
Floors: 22
Architect: Norman Foster and Jean Nouvel
Developer: Legal & General


This tower's unusual shape has earned it the nickname of "Darth Vader's helmet". In addition to the main building, there will be
a publicly accessible exhibition space housing the remains of the Roman Temple of Mithras, which used to stand on this site.
Work is expected to get underway in October 2007.



Scroll to the far right (there are actually 3 pictures. The one on the far right is the new design) ---> ---> --->

[Monkey]

I hate this project. What stands there now is abysmal but this is just as bad. How can you take two of the world's best architects, Norman Foster and Jean Nouvel, and yet still come out with such an piss poor building? It has no coherence whatsoever.

There are some really exciting projects in the City but this is not one of them.

[wjfox]

I think it looks great from some angles - but rather bulky and awkward from others. The best place to see it will be from outside the Bank of England in my opinion (as shown in the 2nd and 3rd pictures).

[london lad]

Best proposal in the city after the pinnacle & 122LH. great use of a central site & some very interesting architecture.

[Mr Bricks]

I think it´s great. The lower more boxy part of the building is a bit ugly though. I don´t like how it´s looming over the street.

[Muse]

The tower component looks like a funky Japanese capsule hotel.

[Skabbymuff]

this one is weird. i like it but i dont at the same time? im not sure! interesting at least. too clumpy from certain views for my liking too.

[Gendo]

Man those are some piss poor renderings.

[Phobos]

I don't think it looks bad.Maybe it will look too fat when you look at it from the other bank of the river.
The facade is strange and the render doesn't give a good idea of how it will look.

[poiman]

horrible

[arsiakas]

nice

[Tubeman]

I quite like this scheme, but I'd be interested to see a rendering from Waterloo Bridge to see how much it invades St Pauls' space on the skyline: I suspect it may be a little too close for comfort.

[Brightonboi]

Omg, What terrible pictures, It looks like it was taken in the 80's with that quality.

[Tharpe]

i wish they proposed a 60's tower block instead of this

[Agent Vengence]

terrible

and how is it named Darth Vaders helmet? i don't see any resemblance

[wjfox]

If I post this model, from this angle, then surely you notice a resemblance...

[Columbus]

Hideous, far to bulky for the skyline

[Varenukha]

I am going off this project - it's shape, a gradually inclining slope to a wide upper section, has a quality which is the opposite of "soar". Although I really like the design and its audacity, it is yet another example of London going for iconic rather than coherent. The skyline will look a bit of a mess, undoing the excellent job that Bishopsgate, 122LH and Heron are going to do.

[DarJoLe]

Originally Posted by Varenukha

IThe skyline will look a bit of a mess, undoing the excellent job that Bishopsgate, 122LH and Heron are going to do.

Not really. In fact, it actually binds the cluster better together when you see it from the west by creating a rather cool 'rippling' element between Swiss Re and 20FC.

[Varenukha]

I'm really not convinced, but then all that anyone has seen are renders, which as someone else has pointed out, are not of a fantastic quality. But, whilst not taking issue with interesting and challenging architecture, this one does provide support to those who believe that there exists an inconsistency and incoherence in London's architectural development.