SkyscraperCity banner

1 - 20 of 702 Posts

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,330 Posts
Discussion Starter #1
I'm not sure if this project has been reported on to date:

Profits soar at Wilkinson Eyre - BD

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/profits-soar-at-wilkinson-eyre/5070162.article

The practice won four major commissions following invitations to enter international design competitions. These are Battersea Power Station, the $2 billion Barangaroo casino development in Sydney, a large commercial development in Toronto and a tower next to the Cheesegrater in the City of London for Japanese corporation Mitsubish

Also:
http://www.ctbuh.org/News/GlobalTallNews/tabid/4810/Article/861/language/en-US/view.aspx

Wilkinson Eyre has won a competition to design a development for the Mitsubishi Estate Company (MEC) in the City of London at a site stretching from 150 Leadenhall Street to 6-8 Bishopsgate. The practice will design multiple options, including a renovation of the existing buildings and a new tower scheme.

The complex will be located next to the site of the abandoned Pinnacle skyscraper scheme.

With Stanhope as development manager, MEC will acquire control of the site in 2015, setting work to finish three years later.

"This project further represents our strong commitment to the UK," MEC UK Managing Director Hiroyuki Arimura said in the company announcement. "Given the excellence location of this site, we believe as the economy strengthens, this scheme will be particularly well timed to take advantage of the expected rise in City demand."

For more on this story, go to Architect's Journal.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,042 Posts
I worked in both buildings as a first jobber temping for Deutsche Bank in 1996. Would be no great loss but would have to be a pretty narrow development. Its in the right area for it though.
 

·
Hello
Joined
·
1,704 Posts
They'll presumably want to move quickly on this one if they really do want to take advantage of increasing demand in The City.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
11,692 Posts
This one is probably one for the next cycle.

I would guess a planning app won’t be submitted until at least the end of the year as WE were only appointed towards the end of last year. It would then probably gaining permission mid- 2015. Leases in the current buildings don’t expire until into 2015 at any rate so you would think the earliest work could start on soft strip out and then demo would be the back end of 2015.

By then a good half dozen smaller projects over 100,000 sq ft will be U/C as well as the Scalpel and potentially the Pinnacle and 100BG with an approved 40 Leadenhall Tower in the pipeline.

It will be interesting to see what they come up with as it will be very close to the Pinnacle and due to sight constraints with St Paul’s will probably block a lot of the view of 122LH from the West.

There’s also potentially 2 over nearby plots with potential towers being worked up although the way the City of Planners seem to be discouraging towers for mid rise blobs it’s not a given.
 

·
Administrator
Joined
·
34,160 Posts
It will be interesting to see what they come up with as it will be very close to the Pinnacle and due to sight constraints with St Paul’s will probably block a lot of the view of 122LH from the West.
it'll be quite a bit shorter than 122 LH. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
804 Posts
I just hope that the right part (the midrise) won't be part of the new tower. I wouldn't want it to block Leadenhall. Where the taller tower is though, yeah I'd like it to be bit taller but remain boxy and slim.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,875 Posts
I for one will be sorry to see these rather fine, although small, examples of the 1970s International style disappear. London has very few quality buildings of this era left and will, I feel certain, regret it. It seems very few developments of the last 30 years have much of a life with the City's overwhelming desire to pull down and build anew, not always an improvement.
 

·
Let the Jam decide
Joined
·
2,082 Posts
I for one will be sorry to see these rather fine, although small, examples of the 1970s International style disappear. London has very few quality buildings of this era left and will, I feel certain, regret it. It seems very few developments of the last 30 years have much of a life with the City's overwhelming desire to pull down and build anew, not always an improvement.
I agree; keep and build the tower elsewhere
 

·
Lord of the Cornish Pasty
Joined
·
758 Posts
I for one will be sorry to see these rather fine, although small, examples of the 1970s International style disappear. London has very few quality buildings of this era left and will, I feel certain, regret it. It seems very few developments of the last 30 years have much of a life with the City's overwhelming desire to pull down and build anew, not always an improvement.
Really? Couldn't care less about it, personally. It's ugly, dated and uninspired. Just because there's not that much of it around the City any more isn't much of a reason to keep it if something better can replace it.
Dunno if its replacement will be better though... probably won't be outstanding. Too small a site, I think.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
2,710 Posts
I'm going to leave it until I see the proposed tower to make a final judgement, but it really would be a shame to lose this tower for anything less than outstanding. The only reason I'm not entirely against losing it is that on a global scale towers in this style are ten a penny.
 

·
Hello
Joined
·
1,704 Posts
I really like this building too. I think it's aged very well and is still a good addition to the City. I agree with grapesVpelli, you could put this building in the middle of any financial district in the world and it would somehow fit in! I would go as far as to say this is an iconic building for the City. I'd like to see it stay.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
4,875 Posts
Really? Couldn't care less about it, personally. It's ugly, dated and uninspired. Just because there's not that much of it around the City any more isn't much of a reason to keep it if something better can replace it.
Dunno if its replacement will be better though... probably won't be outstanding. Too small a site, I think.
'Ugly, dated and uninspired'! Couldn't be further from the truth. I for one like the small jewel-like Tokio Marine building, the other one is more run of the mill. But, as you say, the plot is narrow and of course the Lutyens building 'must' remain as that is historic (!), despite its ugly rear side now on public view. Surely they can adapt these corner buildings and retain the smaller of the two. I would like to see the taller building simply given a height increase and improvement to its ugly roof bits.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
1,511 Posts
I agree. This could be refurbished and extended to great effect. It is a classic Miesean office building -- a slice of Chicago or NYC, exceedingly rare in Europe, and the bronze cladding is a luxury that we will never see again (far too expensive for greedy developers' these days).
 
1 - 20 of 702 Posts
Top