It is currently Wed Sep 26, 2018 10:35 am


Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

if it's about Cardiff.. Sport, Entertainment, Transportation, Business, Development Projects, Leisure, Eating, Drinking, Nightlife, Shopping, Train Spotting! etc.. then we want it here!
  • Author
  • Message

URBANO

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 1:17 pm

The " My view is as good as your view" line is not self evidently true, and can only be tested by debate......which you seem strangely averse to.

And even you seem to be in two minds ......not sure how you can both "reserve judgment" and in the same breath state "I don't believe this tower will be a crappy tall building".

Your line appears to amount to nothing more than a depressing "its better than nothing", which is not only also not self evident but has a danger of becoming self -fulfilling ( as it has in the past in Cardiff)

I'm not the only one on this forum who think building this will end up as a tiresome turd......

Perhaps some debate ....debate....over how we might avoid these mistakes rather than simply repeat them over and over again might be more constructive. What do you think? If so ,Ii for one am happy to get stuck in. Any other takers?
Offline
User avatar

paul cardiffwalesmap

  • Posts: 841
  • Joined: Tue Jul 15, 2014 11:27 am

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 1:36 pm

URBANO wrote:The " My view is as good as your view" line is not self evidently true, and can only be tested by debate......which you seem strangely averse to.

And even you seem to be in two minds ......not sure how you can both "reserve judgment" and in the same breath state "I don't believe this tower will be a crappy tall building".

Your line appears to amount to nothing more than a depressing "its better than nothing", which is not only also not self evident but has a danger of becoming self -fulfilling ( as it has in the past in Cardiff)

I'm not the only one on this forum who think building this will end up as a tiresome turd......

Perhaps some debate ....debate....over how we might avoid these mistakes rather than simply repeat them over and over again might be more constructive. What do you think? If so ,Ii for one am happy to get stuck in. Any other takers?



Sorry I'm to busy to spend any more time in a discussion that goes around in circles! :roll: however to repeat myself I'm aware that the cladding on this building has changed from the renders that were shown - however I still think it'll end up looking good and I'm very pleased that we are getting it. That is my opinion it will NEVER be the same as yours and I'm fine with that. That's us done on this one but I have to say that Cardiff would be the very low rise city that I don't want if you were to be the judge of what was constructed. :(
CARDIFFWALESMAP http://www.cardiffwalesmap.com ---- CARDIFWALESMAP TWITTER https://twitter.com/cardiffwalesmap
CARDIFF DEVELOPMENTS flickrphotos https://www.flickr.com/photos/8761770@N05/

URBANO

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 1:46 pm

The Guardian on towers in London......

" On the question of being "well designed", the supporters of these towers will produce the well-worn arguments that design is subjective, that St Paul's was derided in its day and so on. One could, however, look for what might be thought qualities of good design and usually they will be hard to find.

Do they, for example, show consideration of scale or proportion or try to make a meaningful relationship with their surroundings? Is there anything special about their detail? Is there consistency or integrity in their overall concept? Do they create handsome new public spaces at their base? Does their internal planning produce the best possible living or working spaces, which are well laid out and make good use of daylight?"

Many more.....
Offline

DaiB

  • Posts: 66
  • Joined: Wed Jul 16, 2014 7:13 am

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 2:12 pm

Simple fact is you could ask those exact same questions about low rise buildings, and many many modern ones would fail. But somehow these sort of things only get asked about high rises. Perhaps we should be grateful to tall buildings for raising discussion points which should apply across the board…

Anyway, since you ask, as far as this building is concerned:


Do they, for example, show consideration of scale or proportion or try to make a meaningful relationship with their surroundings?
The podium floors are of a height consistent with the lower buildings on Charles Street, and there are other taller buildings in the vicinity such as Admiral, Helmont House and Landmark place which enable this building to form the focal point of a cluster of taller buildings.

Is there anything special about their detail?
The ‘mesh’ cladding used in places is unusual and provides a transition between the red cladding and the glazing, as well as softening the intensity of the white cladding on the tower.

Is there consistency or integrity in their overall concept?
It’s a fairly simple design, with strong vertical lines and decent sized windows. Utilises a façade overrun to keep the design consistent to the very top. No dependence on tacked-on architectural ‘features’.

Do they create handsome new public spaces at their base?
No, but it will enhance the new public space outside Admiral / St David’s 2 by including additional restaurant and shop units, and bring further life to the southern end of Charles Street.

Does their internal planning produce the best possible living or working spaces, which are well laid out and make good use of daylight?"
The tower portion especially would appear to have generous windows, which I will dare say make much better use of light than many of the low rise student blocks in Cardiff. Can’t speak for the quality of the spaces, but I suspect they’ll be no worse than the norm for students, and given the price probably better than most.
Offline

moyceyyy

  • Posts: 331
  • Joined: Sun Feb 12, 2017 2:03 pm
  • Location: Llanelli

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 2:56 pm

URBANO wrote:As far as I can see, the only change is from bronze to red cladding. The white cladding looks exactly the same as in the original renders.So I don't know why the white bits are causing so much fuss now.

More broadly, though,I suspect this building is going to look pretty dire – and illustrates, yet again, the limited vision of those who seek height for height sake.


Last time I'm saying this. We're not building up "for height's sake" - or at least thats not the ethos. There are very important socio-economic reasons for us to be building up.

URBANO

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 3:25 pm

Of course – you could...... indeed should..., ask questions like this of any building. That's rather my point! I was only referring to high rise because of the fact that it was high rise buildings in particular which were being greeted with unrestrained ecstatic enthusiasm on this forum whilst any debate on their merits and demerits was being closed down on the altar of "better something than nothing". And I found that banal and depressing.

I found your points very interesting. I'm not sure I agree with all of them.

I don't think this building forms part of a cluster. A cluster is where buildings are very closely related to each other – and there is far too much space between this building and the other buildings that you've mentioned, with the exception of the Admiral building, which is more medium than high rise. I think this one looks pretty isolated.

Whilst the podium has a rough approximation in scale to its surroundings, the tower does not. It dominates Charles Street, where there are still parts which retain real character. It can also be seen from other parts of the city – for example, Cowbridge Road looking towards the Angel was a relatively harmonious panorama but now has this building sticking up. The point being that tall buildings not only affect the immediate area but also impact on the rest of the city in ways which are only fully appreciated once they're built.so I think that one has to look at "surroundings" in a much more intense and critical way – basically, look at the city as a whole very carefully, because the city as a whole is often affected by them

I think it's a rather sad day when one considers a bit of metal mesh to be special detailing. Even if one were to accept that, it is more than offset by the boring, tiresome predictable cladding which – as one person on this site has said – makes it look like a 1960s building which has been re-clad. Actually, it doesn't look far off a tarted -up local authority tower block. There may be consistency in the cladding, but no integrity.

The point about public space does not really apply here – there really could never been any, but it does not invalidate the issue when applied to other buildings; at least some admittedly rather feeble attempt was made to consider that aspect with the Raddison Blu (and to a degree with Capital Tower).

I also think that the relationship of the new building with the chapel is very unfortunate. It couldn't be more brutal, really. Looking from from Churchill Way, the facade on the podium is almost 90% cladding. Further, you have the black square box behind the chapel which dominates it both in bulk and height and also in its aggressive boxlike appearance in contrast to the distinctly un-boxlike chapel . Some form of accommodation (not in the housing sense!) between the two should have been attempted. Indeed, there could have been a very interesting solution there , but the opportunity has been totally missed ( or more likely rejected).

I appreciate some might say “how exciting” about this building.. But if you saw it in, say, Birmingham who in their right mind would say “ how exciting”. It would be truly sad if anyone did. And if you saw it in, say, Bordeaux ( a vigorous city), or Oxford, wouldn’t you say say “ oh no, they’re buggering up a fine city with tat ”. Cardiff isn’t Bordeaux or Oxford ( before anyone tells me) but the principle is the same . What we do have in Cardiff which is good is being buggered up by the equivalent of ponced -up local authority tower blocks ......dull mediocrity which we are stuck with for the foreseeable future.

Does anyone get excited about Altolusso still?

The one in Park Place is a truly tragic example, grossly bullying and discordant in style and bulk , pissing over a calm and harmonious ensemble of fine Victorian and Edwardian buildings.....effectively for ever.
Offline

AlwaysBeBlue

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2014 11:15 am

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 5:48 pm

URBANO
what is your problem ?
No city has great mid and high rise buildings in their entirety.

Are you some bitter swansea town Herbert?

URBANO

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 6:02 pm

Oh Please!

If that's all you have to say .......
Offline

AlwaysBeBlue

  • Posts: 100
  • Joined: Sat Aug 09, 2014 11:15 am

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 6:07 pm

URBANO wrote:Oh Please!

If that's all you have to say .......


Cardiff will never be Dallas, so unless you are willing to fund one of these high rises or come up with an alternative, give it a break

URBANO

Re: Charles Street Mixed Use Development with Tower

PostTue Nov 28, 2017 6:15 pm

Why don't you follow your own advice. You're contributing nothing.
PreviousNext

Return to Cardiff Wales Map forum

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: MattW, murfilicious and 7 guests

cron