SkyscraperCity banner

Status
Not open for further replies.
1 - 20 of 502 Posts

·
Banned
Joined
·
162 Posts
je ne connais pas grand chose de cette grande angleterre hormis que c'est une brave nation et que la france a bien de la chance d'avoir un tel allié. :)
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
386 Posts
logue said:
je ne connais pas grand chose de cette grande angleterre hormis que c'est une brave nation et que la france a bien de la chance d'avoir un tel allié. :)
C'est vidéo gag? Il est où Marcel Belivaud?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,782 Posts
Retour à Londres.

Modernisation de la station de Westminster 2008-2013

Victoria Station set for major upgrade
6-9-2005 000


One of London Underground’s (LU) busiest and most congested stations is set for a major upgrade, as Mayor Ken Livingstone today announced the award of a contract to design the redevelopment of Victoria Underground station.

Part of TfL’s five-year, £10bn Investment Programme, LU has awarded a contract for the design of the Victoria Station Upgrade to Scott Wilson. The £500m project is due to start in 2008 and be complete in 2013, to coincide with the planned Victoria line upgrade.

When complete, the Victoria Station Upgrade project will increase the size of the station by 50% with a new ticket hall, lifts and escalators to ease congestion and provide step-free access from street level to Victoria, Circle and District line platforms.

Mayor of London, Ken Livingstone said:
“The £500m Victoria Station Upgrade project is a great example of the investment TfL is now making to improve the Tube and transport in London. It is essential to support the continued growth and development of London and will also support the extra capacity to the Victoria line, due to be delivered by new trains and signalling system in 2013.

“This project would not have been possible without the investment now being delivered by the TfL five-year £10bn Investment Programme. We are now seeing the benefits of being able to plan and invest in London’s future, denied to this great city for so long.”

Used by over 75 million passengers each year, Victoria Underground station is at the heart of London’s transport network, but severe congestion during the morning peak has made station control measures an almost daily occurrence. With funds guaranteed as part of the TfL Investment Programme, this key project is due begin construction in 2008 delivering major passenger benefits by 2013 including:

Cuts in peak time congestion and improved capacity with a new ticket hall and entrance to the station beneath Bressenden Place and new escalators;
Better Station access for all passengers with new lifts in the Victoria line ticket hall providing step-free access to all platform levels and wider stairs to the national rail station.


 

·
Le Havre, Porte Oceane...
Joined
·
12,419 Posts
Bien sur on n'oublis pas le "M" de Mac Do sur les rendus :)

C'était une des stations qui a subis les attentats ?
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,782 Posts
Quelques demandes de permis de construire récemment mises en ligne :

22 Marsh Wall, Isle of Dogs
Construction of four buildings (two of 8, one of 27 and one of 40 storeys) to provide 691 dwellings, 1,387 sq.m. office space, 1,325 sq.m. community space, retail space and leisure space, and 6,636 sq.m. plant, public spaces and 192 car parking.
London Borough of Tower Hamlets

Axe Street Car Park, Barking
Involves redeveloping a surface car park into a wholly residential scheme. It includes the erection of a mixed-level building (3/4/6 storeys) and a 15-storey tower to provide 136 flats.

2 Pier Road Woolwich, London Borough of Newham
The application is for a 16-storey residential-led tower of primarily glass, steel and terracotta panelling construction. It comprises of 97 residential apartments, 27 of which are affordable key worker units.

Sites 1 & 2, Poplar Business Park, London Borough of Tower Hamlets
Redevelopment of site by erection of two new buildings rising to 10 and 25 storeys for mixed use scheme of retail units at ground and first floors with 228 residential units above comprising of 130 one bedroom units, 88 two bedroom units and 10 three bedroom units.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,782 Posts
Oh Misère Sussucre ! la question qui mériterait des pages et des pages et qui te barberait lol au final! nan, en fait c tres compliqué. ;)

Il y plusieurs compagnies privées chargées de moderniser le réseau. Elles ont jusqu'en 2026 si je me rappelle bien pour le faire. Elles ont des objectifs à atteindre chaque année, qu'elles ratent systématiquement. 16 milliards de livres sur 25 ans.

TUBE PPP
London Underground has a history of under-investment, stretching back decades, and in 1997 the Government proposed a Public Private Partnership (PPP) for the London Underground which sought to provide a sustained high-level of funding together with the engineering skills required to rehabilitate and regenerate the Tube.

After a passionate public debate, the London Underground PPP was concluded at the end of March this year (2003).

In short, the PPP structure divides the London Underground into four parts for the next 30 years – three private sector infrastructure companies, or Infracos, and a public sector operating company, namely London Underground as part of TfL.

The three Infracos take control of London Underground’s assets – the trains, tracks, tunnels, signals and stations – which are effectively privatised for the next 30 years. London Underground will manage the PPP contracts and provide train operators and station staff.

The three Infracos are based on groups of Tube lines as follows:
- SSL (Sub-Surface Lines): Circle, District, Metropolitan, Hammersmith & City and East London Line;
- BCV: Bakerloo, Central, Victoria and Waterloo & City;
- JNP: Jubilee, Northern and Piccadilly.

The SSL and BCV Infacos are the responsibility of Metronet, a private sector consortium of Balfour Beatty, WS Atkins, Bombardier Transportation, Thames Water and Seeboard.

The JNP Infraco has been transferred to Tube Lines, a private sector consortium of Bechtel, Jarvis and Amey.

It is the responsibility of the Infracos, Metronet and Tube Lines, to raise the money to invest in London’s Tube network and carry out the maintenance and engineering work that should lead to its regeneration and improvement.

The delivery dates for, as an example, new trains and refurbished stations have already been agreed and are written in the PPP contracts. But it is TfL’s responsibility to manage the PPP contracts so that the Infracos deliver the improvements to the Tube network they have promised.

TfL’s new London Underground management, led by new Tube Managing Director Tim O’Toole, will manage London Underground in the best interests of Londoners and Tube users, to ensure that the many improvements promised by the Infracos are delivered on time and on budget.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,526 Posts
2026, ils sont optimistes... y'a de la marge vu l'etendue du travail a fournir ! mais bon 26 milliards de livres, ça motive !
merci pour ce resumé.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
9,782 Posts
CABE applaudit BEETHAM TOWER

Meeting Date: 09/03/2005
Location: Southwark
Region: London
Architects: Ian Simpson Architects
Scheme Description: Proposal for 68 storey tower and three other buildings from 5 to 7 storeys containing commercial offices, a hotel, retail and leisure uses and residential apartments, plus new open space.





CABE Comments


In summary, we think that this scheme would be a bold addition to the London skyline and believe that this island site at the bridgehead of Blackfriars is a suitable location for a tall building, provided it is of the highest quality. We recommend that the quality of the detail design, materials and finishes are secured through planning conditions. We have reservations about the configuration of the family housing and are concerned that there are weaknesses in the streets and spaces in and around the development.

Tower

We think that the dynamic sculptural form and elegant proportions of the tower work well. We also enjoy the seeming precariousness of the balanced form.

While we were impressed by the drawings and model of the tower presented, we are concerned that the promise of the proposals may not be realised in built form; we note, for example, that the glass is likely to look darker and more solid than either the transparent model or visualisations imply. In this case, we believe the success of the project will be dependent on achieving a seamless curved glass outer skin. While we do not doubt that the architects have the skills to achieve the high quality building proposed, we suggest that lessons could be learned from their experience of detailing glazed facades in similar schemes in Manchester (the Beetham Tower and No 1 Deansgate). Other extensively glazed buildings in London have failed to live up to their promise in the way that they have turned out in reality. Architect, developer and planning authority each need to give this point careful consideration.

We recognise that considerable thought has gone into the design of the building envelope. However, we would like to draw attention to a number of technical issues that will need careful resolution to ensure that the expression of the pure sculptural form is not compromised. We recommend that the quality of the detail design, materials and finishes are secured through planning conditions. In particular these should address:

the fixing detail of the glazing to achieve a seamless outer skin.
the strategy for lighting between the outer and inner skins and how this will affect the appearance of the tower in twilight and night-time views.
the environmental performance of the envelope, including the ventilation strategy for the flats; we are encouraged that the scheme proposes to exceed the current requirements for Part L of the Buildings Regulations.
the way that the glazed façade is extended down to the lower levels.
the design of the inner skin; we think that the use of coloured panels behind the glazed facade could look dramatic, particularly in views across Blackfriars Bridge. If this detail is considered to be fundamental to the design of the tower, then we believe there is a strong case for conditioning the design of the inner skin as part of the planning consent.
We commend the proposal for providing a publicly accessible sky deck at the top of the tower. In our view and in line with the joint CABE and English Heritage Guidance on Tall Buildings, a tall building of this prominence would only be acceptable if the public are able to enjoy the views it will provide. We therefore encourage the architects and developer to address any issues that are likely to affect the viability of this proposal at this stage, such as cost, access or security.
Public realm

We think that, in general terms, the proposal to provide both activity at street level and a new upper level plaza works well. We find the three-dimensionality of the design of the plinth exciting, particularly the cut through allowing daylight and views down into the ground floor of the hotel from above. We note that the central public plaza at first floor level has been simplified and think that it is now better organised and more successful as a destination space. However, we find the access routes narrow and do not feel that they provide a gesture of an appropriate nature.

At the road junction between Stamford Street and Blackfriars Road, the large overhang of the building above the splay in the road is a shortcoming which we find unacceptable. We strongly urge the London Borough of Southwark to carefully consider the impact of this aspect of the scheme on both pedestrians and drivers. We are not aware of any successful precedents for this and make the comment that similar historic examples are being removed.

In terms of microclimate, we understand that the effects of the tower on wind movement and overshadowing have been tested. The local planning authority needs to be satisfied that the area beneath the tower will be a comfortable gathering space, in our view.

Uses

We think that the issues associated with the provision of family housing in an urban environment need to be addressed. We think that further thought is needed in relation to who the development is providing homes for; the kind of residents has implications for the location and internal planning of the units and the external space provided. We welcome the provision of private open space for the proposed flats located at third floor level, but are disappointed to see how few units benefit from this positive addition.

The design of the block on Rennie Street does not convince us that this site is a suitable location for family housing for a number of reasons:

There is a lack of external amenity space, other than the small number of private terraces.
The noisy and late night A3 uses at plinth level may not be an appropriate mix with the family accommodation above.
From experience, we suggest that the long narrow internal corridors will be difficult for an RSL (Registered Social Landlord) to manage; there are some successful examples of internal corridors in private developments such as Glen Howells’ Timber Wharf and Lifschutz Davidson’s refurbishment of the Piper Building.
We find the location of the main residential entrance for the RSL housing on what is effectively service road unsatisfactory. We note that Rennie Street is identified as a new pedestrian route in the adjoining scheme by Wilkinson Eyre and suggest that the status of this route is resolved as part of the co-ordinated public realm strategy.
Declaration of interest

Ian Simpson is a member of CABE’s Design Review Panel. He was present at the meeting as the architect of the project and took no part in the forming of the panel’s views.

Les Sparks referred to his role in facilitating recent workshops in Southwark to assist the Council in drawing up its Urban Design Framework for the northern part of the Borough.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
3,526 Posts
Manuel said:
Oui elle est trop haute je trouve aussi. 50m de moins serait pas.
bah en lui greffant qq low-rises de 90m à sa base, et la transition sera faite plus facilement... wait and see !
 
1 - 20 of 502 Posts
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top