Does anyone know when the external renovation is due to begin on the former Royal Sunalliance building also known as the sandcastle? I did read a while ago that the owners are going to refurbish it inside and out.
Printable View
Does anyone know when the external renovation is due to begin on the former Royal Sunalliance building also known as the sandcastle? I did read a while ago that the owners are going to refurbish it inside and out.
I was wondering what the sandcastle is :)
good name for it too :D
Sound doing the inside but a shame to do anything to the outside, I've always liked the Royal Insurance building and love the textured look of the concrete. Recladding it will make it bland and lose it's 70's character.
Wouldn't complain If they refurbished with Dynamite.:PDT_Piratz_26:
That's the best pic I have ever seen of it! Overall, I agree with Max. Dynamite - soon.
I don't think there is going to be any new cladding, I think they are going to get rid of all the individual windows and make them into long panoramic windows instead. I used to hate this building, but over the years I have come to like it because of it's uniqueness. The building is actually extremely well designed and is widely regarded as one of the best designed office buildings in the country which is years ahead of its time. I think that putting the new windows in will make the building more attractive, without losing any character. Use link for more info!
http://www.downing.com/sectors/index...g/IMG_0053.jpg
Thank you.Quote:
Originally Posted by Jericho
I always thought it looked rather fortress-like, although I don't dislike it as much as I did.
I like this building, i agree it does need some attention, but it has such a majesty on the waterfront, which is slowly being complemented by smaller buildings on princess dock.
I think the opening up of the windows will be good, maybe some intergration with the surrounding areas, opening up the first and second floor for retail or restaurants around that area, might make it a bit more welcoming
The only problem with lengthening the windows etc is that the building was designed to lose as little energy as poss through the windows so they (as well as for aesthetic reasons) are a big part of the character.
People ignore or criticise 60s and 70s buidings far too much and I think we need to be careful we don't lose all of the decent and unique ones - this being a very good example, even using heat exchange pumps to take heating from the water pumped from the loop line and water table. This is a very sophisticated building for its time and as stated by someone else - very distinctive. Dont forget that buildings like Oriel chambers were slated when they were built because they were not fashionable and are now seen as being iconic.
The only criticism I could have of this building are the features related to the shankland plan i.e. high walkways etc. However, these can't be taken in isolation as the building was built at a time when all buildings being built in the city centre had to address this as part of the widescale masterplan.
Aesthetics is one of those things that is so opinion led that people will never all agree on with a building such as this. However, architecture is not always just about aesthetics and good buildings have to be functional as well. This is a very good example of a building that marries function and form in a unique package and in my opinion should be repaired if neccesary and kept as is.:)
New tower for ‘sandcastle’
PLANS are in place to add a tower of up to 20 storeys to Liverpool’s “Sandcastle.”
The former Royal & SunAlliance office block sold to Liverpool developer George Downing for £51m last year has foundations strong enough to support a 20-storey tower.
But the ECHO understands Downing will be guided by city planners over the height of the eventual scheme which is set for the waterfront side of the block now renamed The Capital.
The development is under wraps, but sources say three designs have been prepared by different architects, including one described as “spectacular”.
Building materials will not match the current “sandcastle” design but will complement it.
A mixed-use development is the most favoured and could include an hotel with extensive conference facilities, offices and also apartments.
One source revealed: “Their vision is for a modern, cosmopolitan business hub with different occupiers.”
Downing Developments started the first phase of refurbishment last year which will transform the property into a modern corporate location. The 10th floor has been completed and is close to a letting.
A second phase of work was recently approved by council planners to add glazed extensions on floors eight and nine, providing 18,000 sq ft of office space in a £13m project set for completion by 2009.
The creation of a new tower will see the start of work on the third phase, which is understood to have been key to Downing’s presentations to banks to fund the £51m purchase.
Not only is the Capital located in the heart of the business district and overlooking the waterfront, it offers tremendous potential for further development, they told lenders.
“Look beyond the dated 1970s institutionalised interior and consider the development potential,” Downing told the banks.
A spokesman for Downing Developments said today: “I can confirm we are meeting English Heritage and Liverpool Vision this week to discuss the three proposals.
“We want to work closely with them to pick a scheme that makes the best use of this prestigious waterfront location and does the best service to the city.”
The ECHO understands that an announcement on which of the three proposed schemes is favoured is expected to be about a month away.
This sounds mad,I really wish we had a render to look at because I can't get my head around how it will look,even a 10 storey tower on top of that building will look massive.They did say "up to 20 stories" which probably means it will be much less,Downing are just trying their hand I reckon.
If you look at the picture below, I think the tower would go at the very front of the pic where the car park is.Quote:
Originally Posted by Paul D
http://i198.photobucket.com/albums/a...1_photo/07.jpg
I imagined it on top of the highest point as I've shown in the attachment:
I personally don,t like the outside of this monstrosity (have attended lectures inside, not bad) but to add onto it would really turn me against it for good
I don't think the tower is going on top of it, I think it's going next to the existing building. The existing building is having 2 glass extensions placed on the eigth and ninth floors. It says a tower is going to be added to it, not on top of it.
I imagined more like this:
Both seem plausable I suppose,I hope it's a definite improvement because I can't for the life of me work out how it can possibly look.
Wouldn't a tower 'on top' of the existing building involve all that part being demolished?
Something like the Manchester Free Trade Hall.
Adding towers on top or within existing buildings can work.
Norman Foster stuck a 60 storey tower on top of one in New York to great effect.
Design idea for the old sandcastle....
http://onfinite.com/libraries/1195467/9b2.jpg
Great idea, but I doubt a tower that tall would be approved. Still a great idea though:PDT11
'If Only' !!!!...:handclap:
we need to think big, nothing is really sticking out at the moment, nothing is breaking the mold, its impressive but still not as good as it should be, we need real icons to reflect the city's return, not another spirt of concrete like the 60's
Seriously, I would prefer to see a hot-dog stand on that site rather than thast monstrosity.
well thats the kind of reaction that most of Liverpool landmarks recieved.....i dont believe in heritage and conformity so that reaction means the design is going in the right direction! :PDT11
I think it is so concrete and fortress looking..chlosterphobic like a Prison.. yuck!!! Windows may improve it a tiny bit..Yet, I personally, don't like the architecture at all.
Liverpools old charm is being lost rapidly..All the new structures of glass and concrete just doesn't make it visually charming. It was once a lovely skyline from the Mersey .
I think that to go higher is not suitable .. If there is NO space left.. well, then stop smothering and leave it alone.. Too much ... maybe more parks would be nice in a concrete jungle ?:PDT_Aliboronz_11:
Well having "parks" in a major city in replace of new office buildings that make bold statements and provide new investment and jobs is exactly the reason why we need to stop as the public their opinion on new major projects lol ; ) seriously though, the design is not a prison, it would be fully glazed for the facade and reflect the sky and neighbouring architecture, giving the cube a transparency.
Parks are nice, but Liverpool has enough, and green spaces are overrated and not the way to take a city forward.........
I personally don,t think we can afford new parks in Liverpool. The existing ones are not looked after regularly since the parkies went in the sixties. The flower beds aren,t maintained, the grass cut regularly.
If it takes a team of police to look after Stanley Park in the NORTH of Liverpool just to stop the glasshouse from going into extinction, Ive got no hope for the rest of the parks.
Has anyone seen Everton Park since it was created? The thought was there back in the 70s but the spirit of maintenance went out of the window as soon as it was completed.:disgust:
I'm sure we had parkies in the 80's.Quote:
Originally Posted by chippie
They may have had in the South of Liverpool Kev, but the poor north of Liverpool only dreamed of parkies in the 80s:disgust:
I grew up in Croxteth and Lord Sefton's estate (prior to being council run), the woods, corn fields etc. were our playground. Believe me, they had parkies, mad one's, all with nicknames, Google-Eye, Peg-Leg and the likes. Game keepers as well that shot at us. As I used to sprint for Merseyside I was lucky enough never to be caught. I honestly think I would have broken many a world record the speed I scarpered under the threat of getting buck shot fired at me.Quote:
Originally Posted by chippie
Happy days :D
I stand corrected, Kev and Marky. But they are bound to have parkies in Crocky aren,t they, a big estate like that. I was refering to the likes of Newsham and Stanley and Walton Hall parks mainly that are bereft of such fine policing.
Anyway Marky, what were you up to, to have a gamey shooting buckshot up yer,a*** :shock:
I totally disagree with that. There are no green spaces in the city centre anywhere. If you look at any great city it has space set aside for parks.Quote:
Originally Posted by scouseyuppie
Parks are exactly what this city needs. They add value to the surrounding buildings and provide much needed space for city to breath.
The lack of any public space in Liverpool is one of the main reasons I'm looking to leave. I know that there will be a park (of sorts) when the Grosvenor scheme is complete but it's just not good enough. There is no need to shoehorn lettable space into every possible square inch for the sake of greed. Look at New York. I'm sure the land value of Central Park would be astronomical but they have the vision to realize that people need space.
St. John's Gardens is green space slap bang in the city centre - I know it's not a park as in Sefton, Stanley, Wally Hall or Newsham but you wouldn't bring your child into the busy, vehicle polluted city centre for a kick about would you.
There's a few other little havens such as the back of Bluecoat Chambers (was there pre Grosvenor and will be still there afterwards even better I believe) and halfway up Mount Pleasant on the right. Chavasse Park was green space in the city which will be reinstated with a fountain after the work is complete and the bits of green space lost at the Pier Head will be replaced with a public open space around the new canal link - Museum of LL.
Once you get out of the small city centre, it could be said that most of Liverpool is green open land, not to mention all the public parks, which, especially in south Liverpool, almost seem to merge into each other.
Walk out of one, and before you know it you're walking into another.
Manhattan is not quite the best example to quote.
Yes, it's got Central Park, but it's the only decent-sized park in the whole island.
Apart from that, there's Washington Park (not much more than a square), and Battery Park (very small), and I can't think of any others.
Lets not forget the nearby Otterspool Promenade which has just been refurbished and the soon to re-open garden festival site which will be completely open to the public. There's also Everton Park which if renovated, would be a great place to relax which is within 5 minutes of the city centre.
OK, I'll concede with you on St Johns gardens but thats about the only one. Others that have been mentioned are not city centre and Everton park mighty be 5 minutes from the city centre if your in a helicopter.
Battery park is far bigger than anything Liverpool centre will have. I'm not convinced that Chavasse park will be anything like a park once its finished. It will be surrounded on all sides with businesses spilling out into it and no doubt you will be bombarded with advertising as far as the eye can see.
Where are the tree lined streets or quiet places to sit and have your lunch? And if we ever get a summer, where is there (apart from the crouds in Concert Square or the Pump House) to sit and have a drink outside, heaven forbid to eat outside.