Quote:
Originally Posted by Broliv
Yes, it is very confused. A poor design.
I tried to upload a jpeg of Tower 42 but it still doesn't work. Can anyone help?
Printable View
Quote:
Originally Posted by Broliv
Yes, it is very confused. A poor design.
I tried to upload a jpeg of Tower 42 but it still doesn't work. Can anyone help?
Go to: http://www.tinypic.com. Upload it to there. Save the URL. Then use the image button on the editor on this forum and paste the tinypic URL into that.Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
The architects did say a couple of weeks ago that there is still time for them to make any changes to the design that the council/cabe may want. I think if they can make the two different styles of the building merge and flow better and use better quality materials, then it would be less confused whilst still unique.
I personally like the current design
[IMG]http://i28.tinypic.com/30m7sjq.jpg[/IMG]Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
and a bit of the WTC cladding
http://i26.tinypic.com/21b0kxz.jpg
I think they needed to know what they were doing, not be so confused, rather than just be pushed from pillar to post by whomever.Quote:
Originally Posted by AK1
As I say, it must have taken all morning:
http://i30.tinypic.com/ztbwg6.jpg
Is that the NatWest Tower?Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
Some the buildings in Dubai are literally stunning. Although the city should aim above Dubai.
It used to be. Now it's called Tower 42Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
But most are soulless. I like big, bold buildings but the better ones in Dubai are still in the design stages and tend to be smaller scale. The Burj could be great but the real problem is at ground level. There is no city on the street - just highways in the endless desert. As someone said 'a living hell' of a placeQuote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
You are mixing two things up. The streetscape and the buildings. One stunning sight was when approaching Miami at night. All the tall buildings were lit up. During the the day it was awful at street level.Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
Tall buildings does not mean poor soulless streets below.
You say that Tall buildings do not mean soulless streets having just given a good example of how it can go wrong. If all a city had to do was look stunning then you might accept it actually being awful. Somehow I doubt it.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
I am not mixing anything up. I will tell you why I think not: It's all one thing. It's called a city. Dubai is not a city - it is a collection of isolated buildings, standing in the desert, connected by hostile roadways without rhyme or reason. There is no cohesion and no sense of place, something Liverpool has in spades
Is it possible for you offer an objective and reasoned alternate view?
An e.g. of how not to do it.Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
Yes, another example of how not to do it. While Paris, London and New York are examples of how not to do it.Quote:
Dubai is not a city - it is a collection of isolated buildings, standing in the desert, connected by hostile roadways without rhyme or reason.
I just gave to one with examples of how not to and to do it. Just not what you wanted or how you perceived matters. :)Quote:
Is it possible for you offer an objective and reasoned alternate view?
I'm a bit confused. Any chance you could give a good example of how decent tall buildings fit into a decent street scape? You probably have mentioned it but i'm being a bit thick today
Me too. Perhaps if Waterways could focus on the message and not the messenger, we would understand better.Quote:
Originally Posted by Broliv
Where is this focusing on the messenger? E.g's of tall buildings with good streetscapes were given..Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
You said: "Yes, another example of how not to do it. While Paris, London and New York are examples of how not to do it."Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways
Do you mean the ones that are examples of how not to do it or do you mean the ones that are examples of how not to do it?
should be "how to do it".Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
Anybody know when this is likely to be considered by the planning committee?
Dave.
Why choose this photo to illustrate the cladding of the World Trade Towers?Quote:
Originally Posted by petromax
I didn't expect it and it brought memories of that Tuesday flooding back to me.
OMG ! isn't there any other picture of the cladding :eek:Quote:
Originally Posted by PhilipG
That ones a bit macabre !
hi people
does anyone now it the king edwards tower has got the go ahead yet?
or has it been cancelled? if anyone has any info i would be most grateful
thanks:PDT11
Not yet, as it doesn't have planning permission. The developers say they have all funding in place - well they always say that. If it is in place the credit crunch has no impact on it. If not fully in place they may find it difficult getting the money to build.
As this building would come on-line in around 4 years the economy would have picked up from, we hope, this temporary blip.
thanks for the info waterways :thumbsup:
do you no when a decision will be made on wether it will get the planning permission ? i hope it does i think it wuld be good for the city and it may draw in new investors:D
Planning permission may take a time as this is a large building that came under a lot of constructive criticism.
Go to, downloads and "residential move file". A small vid of the tower.
Enter LRW
Peel are proposing the Shanghai Tower in the middle of Prices half-Tide Dock right "in front" of King Edwards. They may have to find a better dock to put it in.
DEVELOPERS plan to flood Liverpool?s ailing city centre property market with more than 700 new apartments.
Last night, parties behind two ambitious waterfront projects said they were close to resolving outstanding financial issues and were expecting to proceed.
more
Liverpool is such a negative city when it comes to advancement. Anywhere else they would be delighted that two new developments are being built for the future and to enhance their city. New developments are "flooding" the city instead of creating accommodation and advancing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Kev
Liverpool has a poor reputation elsewhere as an argumentative go nowhere city where little gets done.
...and two large developments in a recession too. It is clear the writer of the article doesn't want new top class developments.
Ironic really when you consider that Liverpool was made into a great city because it was unafraid to experiment, modernise and advance.
Correct. The number of firsts in the city is phenomenal. The world's firstQuote:
Originally Posted by fortinian
- Steel framed glass curtain walled building
- Air conditioned building
- Passenger railway
- Commercial enclosed dock
- Electric elevated railway
- Large scale ferro concrete building
- Iron framed buildings (churches)
- Interconnected enclosed dock system
- First radio broadcasts
- etc
http://i259.photobucket.com/albums/h...kingedward.jpg
Source: Piercy Daniel
Looks great.
Lets hope the city is "flooded" with many more of these, hopefully on top of all of the ugly old red-brick monstrosoties that make our city look like ww2 ended yesterday.
don't forget to aknowledge the source WW :PDT_Piratz_26:
a person on somewhere on this site was looking for information on st edwards orpanage liverpool, i will try to enclose this old photo c1910 - 1920
Wow! Why not.Quote:
Originally Posted by Waterways