London - Swiss Re

[ddny]

Architect: Foster and Partners

Style: Modern

Year: 2003

Description: Headquarters for Swiss Re

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre1.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre2.jpg

Towers of the past and future (Tower of London - 900 year old castle)
http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre3.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre4.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre5.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre6.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre7.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre8.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre9.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre10.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre11.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre12.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre13.jpg

http://mywebpage.netscape.com/DDNY%20%20Y2K/swissre/swissre14.jpg

[Gulcrapek]

1) How much do you travel?

2) Is that double bar up top permanent? I hope not.

[Kris]

http://www.fosterandpartners.com/internetsite/html/Project.asp?JobNo=1004

www.30stmaryaxe.com

[SUPREMO]

that's one of the best looking skyscrapers in London, if not, the whole of Europe. It would have looked better if they built it taller.

[ablarc]

I like this building, but it is science-fiction architecture. In every photograph it looks like it was photo-montaged in as a computer rendering. It looks like the alien that landed in the middle of the city. Martian architecture.

[Fabb]

That's right.
But it didn't change the cityscape as much as I thought it would.

[ZippyTheChimp]

Blimey.

[TLOZ Link5]

Bloody brilliant.

[TLOZ Link5]

Bloody brilliant.

[JMGarcia]

1) How much do you travel?

2) Is that double bar up top permanent? I hope not.

I think the double bar is permanent for the window washing equipment.

[Fabb]

I hope it's not.
Wasn't it only used by the construction workers ?

[emmeka]

yes it was but it is also on one of the renderings.

the building is great!
Love it, love it, love it.
I also have an apartment in canary wharf and i have a great veiw of the building.
Best thing that happend to london!

[ddny]

1) How much do you travel?

2) Is that double bar up top permanent? I hope not.

1) Not much really...I was only there for 5 days

2) I am not sure...

[Patrick]

I visited London this spring and didn't no nothing about this building. When I first saw it, I couldn't believe my eyes. I love it!

Patrick

[emmeka]

uhuh, well Ive been following its construction for ages.

[JMC]

R. Buckminster Fuller would be proud...

[Kris]

http://www.hughpearman.com/articles5/gherkin.html

[Kris]

November 23, 2003

A 40-Story Pickle Commandeers London's Skyline

By BARRY GEWEN

LONDON

http://graphics7.nytimes.com/images/2003/11/23/arts/gewen.450.jpg
Norman Foster's Swiss Re tower, also known as the gherkin, is redefining how London looks.

London is about to be transformed. Work is nearing completion on 30 St. Mary Axe, also known as the Swiss Re tower, a 40-story skyscraper in the heart of the financial district. The architect is Norman Foster, a man famous for his audaciousness. He designed London's city hall, an eye-catching if utterly weird structure that looks like a bicycle helmet attacked by a madman wielding a large, dull ax. American tourists know Mr. Foster for his exuberant Great Court at the British Museum and for the delightful Millennium Bridge, linking the Tate Modern to St. Paul's Cathedral. But he has never been more audacious than now.

The new tower is circular in shape, resembling, in Lord Foster's words, a cigar. It starts small at the bottom, bulges to its greatest width at the 26th floor, then tapers back to a soft, rounded top. One of its most striking features — in a building that consists of nothing but striking features — is the spiral pattern that climbs up the curved sides, achieved by the slight rotation of each of the floors, with atriums, or "sky-gardens," on every level producing the spiral effect.

The rotation has an ecological as well as a design function: it creates pressure differentials between the floors that pull air in through vents and reduce the need for air-conditioning and energy consumption. Mr. Foster has said, "For me, the optimum design solution integrates social, technological, aesthetic, economic and environmental concerns."

Even before a single tenant has moved into an office, the building has become famous here. "London Will Never Look the Same Again," blared a headline in one British architectural journal last year. And the structure's blatant phallicism has inspired an affectionate nickname: the "erotic gherkin." If you are trying to find it (though how could you miss it?), don't ask a Londoner about St. Mary Axe or Swiss Re; ask how to get to the gherkin.

One of the best ways to get a sense of the building's impact is to stand on the new Hungerford Bridge walkway facing north. The skylines of most cities present a cluster of tall buildings, but London's skyline reads more like a frieze, with the structures spread out in a line. Three dominate: Tower 42 (formerly the NatWest Tower), St. Paul's Cathedral and the gherkin. The streamlined Tower 42 is the tallest of the three, but as an exemplar of the clichéd 3-M thinking (Modernism, Minimalism and Mies) that prevailed in corporate circles a few decades ago, it could be plopped down anywhere from Shanghai to Houston and no one would know the difference. It's the dome of the cathedral and the rounded line of the gherkin that vie for attention.

When Mr. Foster's plan was originally announced, the Dean of St. Paul's issued a sharp protest, saying the proposed building was a threat to the cathedral's "iconic status," and a "challenge that should not go uncontested." It turns out that he was right. Christopher Wren's renowned dome once had the London skyline pretty much to itself. No longer.

Copyright 2003 The New York Times Company

[Kris]

By Dominic Burke:

http://www.pbase.com/image/22870612.jpg

[MonCapitan2002]

I like the building. It looks cool and it most certainly is unique. I would say that is most definitely a good thing.

[Kris]

Modern Britain's instant icon

By Megan Lane
BBC News Online Magazine

It's 25 years since the City of London last got a new office tower, and it's never had one like the Swiss Re skyscraper - known as the Gherkin for its unique shape. Only now officially opened, it has already become visual shorthand for the capital.

Inside the Swiss Re Tower (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/04/magazine_modern_britain0s_instant_icon/html/1.stm)

For three years London has watched the Swiss Re Tower gradually spiral out of the ashes of bombed Baltic Exchange site in the heart of the financial district.

In the initial stages of construction, its curved skeleton could only be glimpsed between the buildings crowding the City's tangled streets. But as it stretched skyward, it crested the packed skyline.

From this glazed tower, the capital spreads out beneath your feet. And just as those inside look out at London, London looks back.

For it can be seen from far and wide, its blue cigar-like shape providing a sharp contrast as it rises above box-like office blocks and familiar sights such as Tower Bridge, the London Eye and St Paul's Cathedral.

As an instant icon of 21st Century Britain, it has all but supplanted the Routemaster bus and Big Ben as shorthand for London on TV, in ads and on film. In Love Actually, it reared above Liam Neeson as his on-screen son told of a schoolyard crush during a stroll along the South Bank.

Even those who have worked long and hard on this newest addition to the skyline say it can still take them by surprise. For architect Norman Foster, whose firm Foster and Partners designed the building, this is one of its many charms.

"We did all the modelling, all the computer simulations to explore how it would look and how it would sit in the City. Yet I love that I still get unexpected views of it from all over London, and unexpected reflections of other buildings in its walls," Lord Foster told BBC News Online.

Architectural one-off

Those who work at 30 St Mary Axe every day - the employees of financial giant Swiss Re, and the construction team still hard at work fitting out the remaining floors - agree.

"The approach to the building is the best part of my day," says one.
Another says that even though he has worked on the project for four years, he still delights in seeing it from vantage points around the capital.

Its innovative design, both in terms of its striking appearance and eco-friendly services - the design maximises daylight and natural ventilation so that it uses half the energy typically required by an office block - marks an evolution in architecture.

"It's part of a wider evolution toward more interesting forms of buildings around the world and here, wonderfully, in London," says Lord Foster.

Onward and upward

It is an evolution that is pushing ever upwards. A century ago, the capital's skyline was still dominated by St Paul's Cathedral. As late as the 1960s, building restrictions meant the chimney on Bankside Power Station - today Tate Modern - could not top St Paul's dome.

While 30 St Mary Axe is by no means London's tallest building - it's topped by the likes of the nearby Tower 42 (formerly the NatWest Tower) and Canary Wharf - it is the first of a cluster of planned skyscrapers.

The "shard of glass" - the 1,016ft London Bridge Tower - is set to be the tallest building in Europe. Last November the Deputy Prime Minister, John Prescott, gave the 66-storey project the go-ahead despite opposition from English Heritage (a body by no means opposed to height, as the Gherkin has its full support).

His decision is likely to encourage other developers to reach skywards. Work has started on a 47-storey glass tower in Manchester. And among the towers on the drawing board are projects in Brighton, and Aldgate and Bishopsgate in London.

But up is not the only way to create a distinctive building.

The 40-storey Swiss Re tower is among 2004's most notable new buildings, but last year's landmarks were far more down to earth - quite literally.

The winner of the prestigious Stirling Prize for architecture was the low-slung Laban dance centre in east London, with the so-called "blinking eye" bridge which links Newcastle and Gateshead taking the 2002 award.

"Where going tall does make sense is in the inner city where buildings are densely-packed and there is little green space," says Lord Foster.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/40092000/gif/_40092871_skyscraper.gif
1. London Bridge Tower 303m - approved
2. Canary Wharf One Canada Square, 237m - completed 1991
3. Minerva Building St Botolph St, 216m or 247m with spire - approved
4. Leadenhall Building 215m or 234m with spire - proposed
5. Tower 42 183m - completed 1980
6. Heron Tower Bishopsgate, 183m or 222m with spire - approved
7. Swiss Re Tower 180m - completed 2004

Story from BBC NEWS:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/go/pr/fr/-/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/3663971.stm

Published: 2004/04/28 14:07:49 GMT

© BBC MMIV

[Kris]

http://www.hughpearman.com/articles5/gherkin_b.html

[Kris]

A restless baron

By Edwin Heathcote

Published: December 3 2004 12:10

“Well, what can I tell you that you don’t already know?” says Norman Foster, as he sits down to be interviewed.

The question is a good one. Foster is one of a handful of genuinely world-famous architects and his work is both widely known and influential.

We are in his Battersea office by the Thames, over which he is in fact Lord, his full title being Baron Foster of Thames Bank. And, looking down the river, it is apparent that no single architect since Christopher Wren has had such an impact on the face of London.

The eastern side of the city is dominated by Foster’s Swiss Re Tower, better known as the Gherkin, the recent recipient of the UK’s top architecture award, the Stirling Prize. Then there is City Hall, the Greater London Authority headquarters and the huge More London site that flanks it. And the “blade of light”, aka the “wobbly bridge”, the first new river crossing in the city for more than a century, opens up a route between London’s old temple (St Paul’s) and its new shrine (Tate Modern). On the other side of London is the gleaming white arch of Wembley Stadium, which towers over London’s drab north-west skyline at a height of 133m.

Wren transformed London for the first time, with St Paul’s and the City spires, but his ambition stretched far wider. He wanted to use the opportunity presented by the Great Fire of 1666 to rebuild London into a planned metropolis like Paris or Rome. He failed, beaten by the lack of absolutism which made such dramatic sweeps possible on the Continent. In the convoluted lanes of London, private property ruled and boulevards such as Kingsway would only happen later when slums were cleared.

Foster, however, has succeeded. His work is visible not only on the skyline, but at street level. The National Gallery looks like it has always been the focus of Trafalgar Square yet, only two years ago, London’s most famous piazza was little more than a traffic island. Foster’s remodelling righted it. His underground station at Canary Wharf is one of the most impressive recent stations anywhere in the world and has contributed to “making a place” far more than have the dim collection of towers around it, one of which is also, unfortunately, by Foster.

With his back to Albert Bridge and the sun glinting off the river behind him, Foster sits me down in the far corner of his enviable, self-designed office. It is a cliche to say so, but the lean, tanned Foster looks younger than his 69 years. “I still get an enormous kick out of being close to the design process,” is his answer to my inept attempt to ask him whether he still feels the same passion about architecture, or whether he is thinking of retirement.

I ask how it feels to have had such an impact on contemporary London. “I feel I’ve been enormously privileged to be able to work on such a scale,” he says. “I’ve always been interested in cities. I grew up in a very urban environment [Manchester]. It is immensely satisfying to see the ways an urban intervention can change its surroundings, the way that a building can exert a ripple effect. The thing that I find exciting about our work in London is that it’s not all about the individual building, but a wider agenda about what makes a city tick. For instance, the attention was on our Great Court at the British Museum, but the fact that we managed to remove the cars from the forecourt there is as important as the other stuff.”

Having built so much in the city, is there anything here he still feels he would like to address? “As an architect, there’s a certain restless quality,” he says, avoiding the question. “The exciting thing about a city is this state of continuous renewal.” Then, looking out of the window behind him, he adds, “There’s always the relationship to the river. Even though everyone is now aware of it, I think there’s still a lot that could be done in terms of improving the relationship of the city to the river.”

Pushed to define a field in which he would like to work, he says something that genuinely surprises me - “affordable housing”. “There’s a real anomaly,” he continues. “If you take the areas where we spend our money, whether it’s furniture or travel, we take for granted a wide spectrum of choice, whether its easyJet or first class, Ikea or Habitat. We don’t talk about affordable travel or affordable furniture, but we still have this stigma attached to affordable housing. It’s a stupidity: housing should just be a matter of choice.”

Is it likely then that Foster and Partners will get involved in social housing? “In Europe and elsewhere we’ve already produced the equivalent of affordable housing. In Duisberg, for instance, we produced a housing scheme with some real oddball apartments on the top floors. Interestingly, it was the odd flats that sold first, but that kind of experiment would be very hard to do over here. We’ve been working in Duisberg for over 15 years on a lot of projects, nothing sensational, but we’ve created canals, transport, infrastructure.” Foster says he has spoken to a developer about a housing scheme in the UK. About time too.

The last few years have not been without controversy for Foster. There was the initial embarrassment of the wobbly bridge; a number of mediocre office developments; mixed reaction to the GLA building and the departure from the practice of Foster’s right-hand man, Ken Shuttleworth.

Foster’s work is criticised for an increasing corporatisation (an idiotic accusation in my opinion, as his work has always looked slick and corporate), and for some of the more eccentric and bulbous shapes of his recent designs - including the snooker balls in a sock of the new Sage centre in Gateshead. But this has hardly slowed Foster’s stride.

As if to prove the point, he moves on to talk about Beijing Airport, “the biggest construction site on the planet” as he puts it. The 1.1 million sq m project is indeed impressive. “There are 20,000 people working on the site 24 hours a day, seven days a week and it will be completed in time for the 2008 Olympics; in fact it’ll be ready in 2007 to allow it to run in,” he says.

Foster has become the acknowledged master of airport buildings, having done Stansted and the Hong Kong International Airport, Chek Lap Kok, the largest airport in the world when it was completed in 1998. As with its predecessors, Beijing International is all about a single, elegant roof, incorporating the minimum of supports to create the maximum amount of flowing, clear space below.

While he has long been known for airports, Foster has recently begun to make a name for himself with skyscrapers. The Swiss Re building has without doubt become the most visible building in London and it is one of the few skyscrapers of recent years to attempt something new. Its soft, sensual form (Foster refers to it as “feminine” in contrast to the angular phallicism of other structures) is unique. “It’s a radical shape,” says Foster “and it was always going to be controversial. It is very nice, though, that a derogatory nickname has ended up as an affectionate term.” Indeed the Gherkin, as it is known, has become one of the very few new structures that Londoners recognise and take to.

The Swiss Re building is also notable for its attempt to reinvigorate the skyscraper as a viable building type, aesthetically, economically and environmentally. The Stirling Prize and the recognition factor have assured success in the first category. But, with half its floors still unlet, the jury is still out on its economic success. Some of the world’s best skyscrapers had trouble filling their floors, however - the Empire State was nicknamed the Empty State for years.

Foster makes few revelations in interviews. His persona, like his architecture, is aloof, sometimes slightly detached. The only time the architectural message slips is when he admits that “the best part of the day is taking the kids to school”. And, even though his lifestyle is hardly that of the typical architect (he pilots his own helicopter; skis from his bulbous, futuristic house in St Moritz and inhabits one of London’s most visible penthouses), he ensures it is his architecture, not his celebrity status that sets the agenda.

As he guides me around the building I comment on how cosmopolitan and young the staff are. “Fifty nationalities, I think, and an average age of 32,” he says.

Most practices, by the time they get to this size and this prominence, run out of steam, the creativity squeezed out by the realities of big business. Not Foster’s. After nearly four decades as Britain’s pre-eminent modernist, he looks unlikely to retire any time soon. The average age of his practice might have to go up a little more.

Edwin Heathcote is the FT’s architecture critic.

Find this article at:
http://news.ft.com/cms/s/5c5167e0-4404-11d9-af06-00000e2511c8,ft_acl=,s01=1.html

[Marksix]

i was at the Swiss Re building yesterday and for those who have not visited, this building has the curious quality of diminishing in size the closer you are to the building until standing at its foot looking up, most of the building becomes invisible.

the convex, compound curves create a building that curves very slightly outward from the base to about one third of its height from which point it starts to curve back inwards rendering the building from that point on invisible from the base.

sadly the building is struggling to attract tennats with flexible 5 year leases being offered. also, a few of the windows have fallen out.

a few hundred metres from Swiss Re is the Lloyds building, another Foster (was it Foster?) building. THis masterpiece is looking a little shabby and needs a good clean. it has been disfigured by the phone masts and even TV arials at its apex :(

[TLOZ Link5]

I think that the Lloyd's Building was designed by Richard Rogers.

That's the sad truth about most post-war skyscrapers. They require constant maintainance because there's nothing charming about a dilapidated glass box...gherkin...whatever.

[Luca]

What's so great about it?

It's tall, it's big, it's shaped like a sex toy. "That don't impress me much".

It's surrounded by a concrete free-fire zone. It shades much more elegant buildings in its vicinity. You will note from some of the pics the missing panels that fell out (that's right, out and DOWN).

They obliterated the possibility of restoring a beautiful historic building (which had been damaged by the I.R.A.) to erect that glass d!ck.

[ablarc]

What's so great about it?
Gives interest to the skyline, a genuine monument to join St. Paul's, Parliament, the Eye and Tower Bridge. At least as interesting as OXO Tower. Used to great effect in Match Point.

[TLOZ Link5]

Photos of the old Baltic Exchange building (from the less than unbiased, but still reliable "London Destruction" Webpage:

http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be1.jpg http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be2.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be3.jpg http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be5.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be4.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be6.jpg

http://www.geocities.com/londondestruction/photos2/be7.jpg

[czsz]

Apparently there was little will to restore it after the bombing, for whatever reason. Anyway, the Baltic Exchange seems more or less nondescript for London. One can find dozens of structures like it around Regent Street alone. The Swiss Re is a much more significant structure, one which has practically become the symbol of British prosperity and modernity since its construction.

It ought to be understood that London, to a lesser extent than New York but far more so than Paris, is not a city that necessarily believes in the virtue of remaining architecturally static. If it's to iconographically compete with American and Asian cities, it will have to some extent make sacrifices in the city centre to achieve this.

Of course, the Blitz ensured that the vast majority of such sacrifices will be cheap postwar garbage, so one oughtn't be concerned demolitions such as that of the Baltic Exchange will be too frequent.

[TLOZ Link5]

I think that the problem was that the Baltic Exchange wanted to restore the building, but it would have been way too expensive to do so. They sold to a developer, who tore down what was left.

Are there any photos of the building after it was damaged?

[czsz]

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/upload/img/DomeAfterBomb.jpg

[newcastle kid]

What's so great about it?

It's tall, it's big, it's shaped like a sex toy. "That don't impress me much".

It's surrounded by a concrete free-fire zone. It shades much more elegant buildings in its vicinity. You will note from some of the pics the missing panels that fell out (that's right, out and DOWN).

They obliterated the possibility of restoring a beautiful historic building (which had been damaged by the I.R.A.) to erect that glass d!ck.

It is now one of the most loved buildings of London, like it or not.

And rightly so. One of the best towers constructed in the last 25 years, anywhere in my opinion.

[Luca]

http://www.nmm.ac.uk/upload/img/DomeAfterBomb.jpg

Yeah...obviously irreparable....:mad::mad::mad:

If this happened today, and not around the time ofa major recession, they would have rebuilt it (I think / hope).

Sad.

[wjfox2007]

What's so great about it?

It's tall, it's big, it's shaped like a sex toy. "That don't impress me much".

It's surrounded by a concrete free-fire zone. It shades much more elegant buildings in its vicinity. You will note from some of the pics the missing panels that fell out (that's right, out and DOWN).

They obliterated the possibility of restoring a beautiful historic building (which had been damaged by the I.R.A.) to erect that glass d!ck.

I just wanted to say, you're a ****ing idiot.

That is all.

[nick-taylor]

Yeah...obviously irreparable....:mad::mad::mad:

If this happened today, and not around the time ofa major recession, they would have rebuilt it (I think / hope).

Sad.The Baltic Exchange took the full brunt of a lorry loaded to the brim with semtex. The damage might look cosmetic, but was structurally unsound. All that could be salvaged is still in storage awaiting a buyer to put back together in what is the world's largest puzzle.

[Luca]

I just wanted to say, you're a ****ing idiot.

That is all.

Since the moderators have not seen fit to address the post above...

wjfox, you're a pathetic little twat who's only brave behind the anonimity of the net. Wanker.

[ZippyTheChimp]

We can't be everywhere, especially in summertime.

However, he did receive an infraction. I guess only the moderators can view it in the member profile.

[alonzo-ny]

Ive only heard of this infraction business recently, how many must one receive before being banned?

[Gregory Tenenbaum]

I dare them to ban me.

I double dare them...

[NYatKNIGHT]

Depends what the infraction is.

Luca, way to take the high road. That's the last time you take matters into your own hands.

[Luca]

Luca, way to take the high road.

:o:o:o
At my age I oughta know better...

[nick-taylor]

Extreme restoration



http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42438000/jpg/_42438336_tradinghall416.jpg


By Megan Lane, BBC News Magazine
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/magazine/6230390.stm
Thursday, 5 July 2007, 11:00 GMT 12:00 UK http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/shared/img/o.gif

Blown apart by the IRA and its ruins painstakingly dismantled piece by piece to make way for the Gherkin, the historic building ends an epic journey to Estonia on Friday - and starts another.

It's the ultimate flat-pack. Fifty numbered crates with arches, staircases, marble columns, panelled telephone booths, plaster sea monsters and even Britannia in all her glory.

All of which can be pieced together to restore the Baltic Exchange, one of the finest examples of Edwardian architecture until it was rocked by the IRA bomb that killed three in April 1992.

The Portland stone and granite facade was taken down and stored in the hope the building might be rebuilt.

But it was too badly damaged. Its Grade II* listed status - one down from St Paul's - was removed and the grandiose trading hall painstakingly dismantled, numbered and photographed at a cost of £4m.

After years on the market, the remains were bought last summer by two Estonian businessmen for £800,000 (1,183,000 euros). Last month they began transporting it to the Baltic state - in 15 40-foot shipping containers - with the last due to arrive on 6 July.

Heiti Haal and Eerik-Niiles Kross plan to resurrect the Baltic Exchange in central Tallinn. Much will be built from scratch, with the original facade and trading hall slotted in. Construction will begin in late 2008 and will take about two years, with offices, a restaurant, ballroom and exhibition space planned.

Project manager Sander Pullerits says it ties in with Estonia's strong maritime background. "And the building itself is unique and will add a magnificent piece of architecture to Tallinn."

Marcus Binney, of Save Britain's Heritage, is delighted. "It was such a wonderful building, so full of atmosphere. It's really wonderful that it'll be reincarnated in a Baltic port, by people who are passionate about it. Otherwise it would just end up as bits of fireplace."

Listed Lego

Which is the usual fate of the materials salvaged from demolished buildings.

Built in 1903, and epitomising Britain's commercial might, shipping contracts were brokered in the teak and marble trading hall at 30 St Mary Axe until the bombing.

Two years later, the Baltic Exchange abandoned plans to rebuild on the site, blaming complex restoration regulations. In 1998 John Prescott gave approval for the protected trading hall to be taken apart. Those campaigning to save it were horrified.

After a rival dealer failed to find a buyer, salvage expert Dennis Buggins of Extreme Architecture took on the task in 2003. He initially gave himself 12 months to sell it.

It took that long just to catalogue and sort the 1,000 ton kitset. "There was a huge amount of boxes. You're talking 40 lorry-loads, all jumbled up. To get it all back in order so you could say to clients 'there's that part and here's that part' took quite a while."

While rebuilding takes no longer than constructing a replica from scratch, what takes time and money is the disassembly and recording of what goes where, says Rosemary Allan, of Beamish Open Air Museum in County Durham. It has relocated a railway station, chapel, Masonic hall and bank, among others.

"Detailed plans need to be made and you have to carefully lift out, photograph and number important pieces such as cornerstones and lintels."

Then there is planning permission for the new site and building regulations - such as new requirements for access - to comply with.

"It's an expensive and time-consuming business," she says. "Our first concern is to see a heritage building preserved on its site, but too many are just bulldozed."

It's thanks to relocations and restorations that traditional construction and decorative skills have not simply died out.

Site specific

As with all property, location is an important consideration when deciding whether to relocate an at-risk building. It may have been designed to fit its landscape, or cityscape, or built from local materials, says Ann Morgan of the Victorian Society.

"In general we are opposed to dismantling buildings and moving them either within this country or abroad. To divorce a building from its context is to sever a link which is often vital to understanding and fully appreciating its worth.

"There is also the question of cultural heritage. People often feel sad when works of art are sold abroad. Buildings are that much more anchored in the places they were made."

While moving buildings is fairly rare, it's likely to happen more often as digital photography and computer modelling simplify the job.

"With several listed buildings on the north Norfolk coast threatened with falling into the sea through coastal erosion over the next 50 years, [relocation] may well be something that we have more involvement with in the future," she says.

Among notable relocations is London Bridge - falling down in the 1960s, it now stands in an Arizona theme park. It was offered to Portmeirion, the "home for fallen buildings", but was too big, says Robin Llywelyn, grandson of Portmeirion's creator, Sir Clough Williams-Ellis.

A jewel in the crown of the village - where cult series The Prisoner was filmed - is a Jacobean banqueting hall which was sawn into bits, packed into straw-lined boxes and stored on the docks for a year before being reassembled in 1938.

"My grandfather bought Emral Hall's panelled ceiling at auction, then bought the rest of the building to have somewhere to put it," says Mr Llywelyn. "The lights, covings and panelling were left in place as it was cut. That it was successfully reassembled is down to the craftsmen."

With the Baltic Exchange sold, next on Mr Buggins' list is the lodge at Temple Bar - Christopher Wren's 18th Century London gateway - and the former Royal Box from Ascot, removed in the recent refurb.

While reclaimed floorboards and worktops are highly sought after, an entire building is another matter.


http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42463000/gif/_42463540_baltic_plan_inf416_2.gif


1. Stained glass WWI memorial: Damaged in the blast, it was taken on by the National Maritime Museum and restoration completed in 2005
2. Nymph fountain: said to be modelled on a chairman's daughter. Now stands in lobby of Baltic Exchange's new premises next door to bombed site
3. Marble columns: Stood sentry around lavish trading hall. As an important feature - and made from expensive stone - these were put in storage and will feature in reassembled hall
4. Traders' pews: For decades, deals were concluded in these cubicles dotted around hall. Became bar seating in Baltic Exchange's new premises after bombing, then given or sold to member companies after recent refurb


When the IRA bombed the Baltic Exchange on 10 April 1992, three people died. This was the sight that greeted those who came to inspect the damage the following day, looking into the ornate trading hall from the entrance lobby.http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/magazine_baltic_exchange_bombing/img/1.jpg


The two fertiliser bombs caused much devastation in the City of London. The Baltic Exchange was eventually dismantled to make way for the Gherkin, but a nearby church was rebuilt.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/magazine_baltic_exchange_bombing/img/2.jpg


While the foundations were too badly damaged to allow a rebuild on site, the facade and trading hall were deemed worth preserving. Important features such as this pediment were put into storage - and are now en route to Estonia.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/magazine_baltic_exchange_bombing/img/4.jpg


Workers dismantled first the facade, carefully numbering and photographing the features worth saving for a future rebuild. Business continued for the Baltic Exchange, which did a straight swap of its damaged premises at 30 St Mary Axe for a neighbouring building.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/magazine_baltic_exchange_bombing/img/5.jpg


The trading hall stood for years longer than the facade in the hopes it could be housed within a new building on the same site. Despite a long campaign to save the hall, it too was eventually dismantled.
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/magazine_baltic_exchange_bombing/img/6.jpg


Eight years after the bombing, workers clearing the site recovered this battered Rolls Royce from the Chamber of Shipping, next door to the Baltic Exchange. (Pictures courtesy of the Baltic Exchange)
http://news.bbc.co.uk/nol/shared/spl/hi/pop_ups/07/magazine_baltic_exchange_bombing/img/7.jpg




http://img59.imageshack.us/img59/5957/sreml7.jpg

[jaja3000jaja]

At night now, after the construction is now finished, does the Swiss Re still radiate such brilliant colors?

And is there a thread yet on the approved London Bridge Tower?

[Luca]

At night now, after the construction is now finished, does the Swiss Re still radiate such brilliant colors?

No, of course not. :rolleyes:

It's not translucent/chrystal-like either. Imagine that, with a London sky that is more often than not the color of light slate :mad:....Who'da thunk ???? :rolleyes:

[newcastle kid]

At night now, after the construction is now finished, does the Swiss Re still radiate such brilliant colors?


The lighting in the city is much more quaint, the towers try not to draw too much attention from St Pauls etc...

With or without a lighting scheme, it is still one of the best modern skyscrapers in the world:)

[newcastle kid]

No, of course not. :rolleyes:

It's not translucent/chrystal-like either. Imagine that, with a London sky that is mroe often than not teh color of light sate:mad:....Who'da thunk ???? :rolleyes:

em... what?

[Luca]

see edited versh without the typos.

What I mean is, when it's time to "sell" new 'scrapers, they always look like brilliant shafts of light. In reality, they look pretty murky. i would prefer limestone to glass.

[newcastle kid]

Actually, Swiss Re looks much better in real life then it did in the renders, where you should be selling your building. I don't think anyone expected it to turn out so great. Infact, the same thing is happening with the Willis Building, and the Broadgate tower.

Yeah I can really see where you got murky from:

Pics from Flickr:

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1362/802029046_f7d9accc83.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1058/746110905_cbf04ea186.jpg?v=0

Next time if you are going to construct an argument, can you not atleast make the points valid. And I have NEVER seen a render whene one of the London skyscrapers looks like 'a brilliant shafts of light'. You know what they look like to me? You are NOT going to believe this!!!...



Skyscrapers.




http://l.yimg.com/www.flickr.com/images/spaceball.gif
Seriously, are you sure you don't like it just because it's 'tall' and your a closet NIMBY?

Just stop living in the past, the future is coming, and it's coming to London. Like it or not.

[ZippyTheChimp]

^
You're just going to have to accept the possibility that Luca doesn't like the building, and get on with your life in spite of this shattering revelation.

Looking for other explanations to reconcile his dislike for it is what those in the psychiatry profession call denial.

We all know what the next step in the grief-cycle is, and that's when it becomes a problem for the moderators.

[macreator]

I heard that there is a restaurant atop the building under the glass roof dome, is that true? And if so, is it open to the public (i.e. Me, next time I'm in London)?

[wjfox2007]

I heard that there is a restaurant atop the building under the glass roof dome, is that true? And if so, is it open to the public (i.e. Me, next time I'm in London)?

Indeed there is... and yes, it's open to the public.

It will cost you about £5000 though, and you'll need a minimum of around 50 guests. :)

http://www.30stmaryaxe.com/content.asp?contentid=4


http://i14.tinypic.com/5063ay1.jpg

[wjfox2007]

You're much better off going to Vertigo 42, which can be found at the top of SwissRe's taller neighbour, Tower 42 -

http://www.vertigo42.co.uk/

[newcastle kid]

^
You're just going to have to accept the possibility that Luca doesn't like the building, and get on with your life in spite of this shattering revelation.

Looking for other explanations to reconcile his dislike for it is what those in the psychiatry profession call denial.

We all know what the next step in the grief-cycle is, and that's when it becomes a problem for the moderators.

No. I just don't like it when idiotic false reasons are used to denounce something.

As I have said. Swiss Re looks better in real life than in renders, and it in no way looks murky at all. As I said, if you don't like something, and plan to let everyone know it, then atleast come up with some proper, none-made up reasons.

[ZippyTheChimp]

"It's fat and ugly."

Is that a fact or an opinion?

[Luca]

No. I just don't like it when idiotic false reasons are used to denounce something.



As I have said. Swiss Re looks better in real life than in renders, and it in no way looks murky at all. As I said, if you don't like something, and plan to let everyone know it, then a least come up with some proper, none-made up reasons.



1. Relax

2. Both pictures you linked to show the Swiss Re with direct sunlight playing off the faceted glass. If you live in London you will know that the most common (mode) single type of weather is dull-overcast. I am looking at Swiss Re right out my office window now, and I can tell you it's not a glittering Jewel. I se it at least 3-4 times a day, every workday and most of the time it looks like a grey lump (from a distance of around ½ a mile).



You like it. Good for you.



As to renders not looking all gleaming etc. just take a butcher’s at the London Projects thread. It's not a problem just here, all architects do it. The same way that a burger looks different in a McDonalds ad and in reality.



As long as people build very large buildings that are one whit below the quality of, say, the Chrysler Building or the Woolworth Building or the Houses of Parliament, I'm not a "NIMBY", I'm more of a "Banana". I won’t cheer something just because it is new, and “different” and tall. That seems asinine and puerile to me.



Back to Swiss Re: I appreciate that some aspects of its appearance/massing are technical in nature (both structural and for air-flow reasons). I don't aesthetically like it. I don't like buildings of that size that have no relief of mass other than a simple geometric shape with no fractality and no detail except some faceting/structural detail. I think they look lumpen and even mildly menacing, despite the height that should normally confer some semblance of grace. Is that clearer?

[Luca]

Re. the restaurant, I had read in The TImes that it was limited to tenants but it appears from a posting that it is available for private booking.

Someone mentionedm Tower 42. In my expereince, teh restaurant is so-so; better to go there for a few drinks (ncie view and all that).

I'll give the Swiss Re this: it's not as butt-ugly as tower 42 :) (I still think of it as the Natwest Tower).

I think the Bishopsgate building is goign to be a bit better; seeing it go up on a daily basis.

[Zephyr]

The first thing anyone will notice with a skyscraper is its exterior. That gives us the aesthetic, the look that we so crave in the height and proportions and the cladding, etc. But there may be other competing interests, as we get to know a given building, especially if that building is well designed. A case in point is Swiss Re's internal structure, which is designed to be better than office buildings of the past.

The outside is a tapering pickle shape building that appears as you approach it to have a multi-helical twist visually emphasized by the harlequin pattern of the multi-colored glass. But look a little closer. This is not a twisting external structure like say Calatrava's Chicago Spire, with its helical rails on the outside. The twist on Swiss Re is on the inside only. There is a consistent spiraling pattern from top to bottom where people appear to not be seen during the height of its use - a void as it were in the shape of a spiral. But why?

Like Chicago Spire, Swiss Re has a rotating floor plate inside, but as yet we have no reason to suspect that Chicago Spire's floor plate will have the deliberate gaps between the floor and the perimeter glass as Swiss Re. This gap creates a deliberate differential in air pressure, and when floors are rotated with this gap, it increases the movement of that airflow.

Once inside the building you can see this more clearly, and experience it more directly. If you know nothing about engineering of a design of this type you might reason the following way. There are the gaps, but the air I feel may be the fans pushing air, or the impact of gravity and the gap. Could be, but there are other forces being induced - passively by these design decisions. In short, natural ventilation is enhanced rather than replaced, ultimately increasing the efficiencies and lowering the operating cost with enormous benefits to the office environment.

For more, see “Spiral atria of laminated glass on Foster's new Swiss Re HQ give office workers a quiet breath of fresh air” Laminated Glass – The Global Review of DuPont Architectural Glass Laminating Solutions

which can be accessed from the following link: http://www.dupont.com/safetyglass/lgn/stories/15072.html