Unless the air intake system has a filter like a nuclear fallout shelter, that's going to happen anyway.
Colossal structure at Elephant - Strata Tower
- Thread starter hipipol
- Start date
Unless the air intake system has a filter like a nuclear fallout shelter, that's going to happen anyway.
Lord Camomile
Yipchaa!
'The Electric Razor' is the one I heard; slightly less romantic
Do like the building though.
cybertect
It's grim up north (London)
Yep - as seen here
And there's one either side of the window here.
One of the architects was explaining that they wanted to have opening windows, but the way the regulations work for a building this tall, you're not allowed a window opening below 1150mm above the floor, which ruled out having the full-height windows swing open, even by a small amount. The alternative was to then have a glazing bar across the window at that height, which would have ruined the view out, so they came up with the ventilation panels to solve the problem, with the bonus that you open up a lot of area for ventilation as they're full height.
They're quite effective at getting a breeze through, especially if you open them in more than one room.
How about this for a bath-time view
For anyone that's interested, I've put up the rest of my pics here.
hipipol
Peckham Wry
Fantastic pics
I stick with the OP word tho, colossal, and entirely out of keeping with its surroundings, but then the Queens House at Greenwich Park probably looking like it had dropped in from fairyland too at first.....
Its hideously modern wonderfulness for those with the wedge is in SUCH stark contrast to its surroundings.... having said that Southwark are embarked on a long slow process to revamp the whole area.......we shall see....
I stick with the OP word tho, colossal, and entirely out of keeping with its surroundings, but then the Queens House at Greenwich Park probably looking like it had dropped in from fairyland too at first.....
Its hideously modern wonderfulness for those with the wedge is in SUCH stark contrast to its surroundings.... having said that Southwark are embarked on a long slow process to revamp the whole area.......we shall see....
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
Those pics are awesome cyber - esp the penthouses! Incredible space.
I hear on the grapevine that they have discovered a major irregularity with the planning permission for this building.
It turns out that the whole thing has got to come down.
It turns out that the whole thing has got to come down.
cybertect
It's grim up north (London)
There's about a 25% of the apartments in the building (98 of them) that are affordable let.
Because of the way that the rules work with such things, they're actually bigger than the flats being sold on the open market.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
That doesn't really make sense. Instead of putting a glazing bar across which would have obstructed the view a bit they've put a full height perforated panel which completely obliterates it.
ATOMIC SUPLEX
Member Since: 1985 Post Count: 3
I wonder how spacey they look without the fisheye.
Yep - as seen here
And there's one either side of the window here.
One of the architects was explaining that they wanted to have opening windows, but the way the regulations work for a building this tall, you're not allowed a window opening below 1150mm above the floor, which ruled out having the full-height windows swing open, even by a small amount. The alternative was to then have a glazing bar across the window at that height, which would have ruined the view out, so they came up with the ventilation panels to solve the problem, with the bonus that you open up a lot of area for ventilation as they're full height.
They're quite effective at getting a breeze through, especially if you open them in more than one room.
How about this for a bath-time view
For anyone that's interested, I've put up the rest of my pics here.
Wow, as long as you don't look down everything looks great
kyser_soze
Hawking's Angry Eyebrow
I've just realised - with that bath you could have a wank and make it look like you're cumming over the whole of London.
editor
hiraethified
So over a year after opening and the 'Britain's ugliest building' prize under its belt, those turbines sure don't seem to be moving much...
http://www.urban75.org/blog/the-rarely-spinning-turbines-of-the-strata-tower-south-london/
http://www.urban75.org/blog/the-rarely-spinning-turbines-of-the-strata-tower-south-london/
editor
hiraethified
I can see them from my window and I think I've only ever seen them moving twice too.
Bahnhof Strasse
Let's av ya fuckin' dancin'!
Tis the modern way tho, green power generation is an 'aspiration'.
George & Bill
semiotically superfluous
There's about a 25% of the apartments in the building (98 of them) that are affordable let.
Because of the way that the rules work with such things, they're actually bigger than the flats being sold on the open market.
A bit late for the example in question, as I'm sure all the flats have been snapped up, but the fact that you were able to come away with this message shows how easily the nonsense of what is now referred to as affordable housing is being sold.
The affordable flats in Strata - 'Esprit' - most of which, afaik, are in the polyp adjacent to the main structure, all fit into the 'shared ownership' category of affordable housing. So you only need to find 25% of the asking price, and you pay 'subsidised' rent (80% of market level iirc) on the remainder.
The starting price for a 1 bed is £210k, which means that the 80% market rent you'd be paying would be on £157,500 worth of flat - to my reckoning, around £700pcm. If you'd managed to save £25k for a deposit, you'd then need a mortgage for the other £27,500 of the share you're buying. If you want to actually own this thing before you retire, you'll need to take out a 10 year mortgage at the longest, which will cost you about another £300pcm (while interest rates hold).
So, this deal, if you take it up with 25k of your own capital at the age of 30, will have you your very own 1 bed flat in Elephant and Castle fully paid off by the time you're 70, for just ~£1000pcm (ex bill, ct and service charge).
This is affordable.
ska invita
back on the other side
I went out to the Coronet last night, and went for a drink in a local before hand and got talking to the landlord: he was saying that the redevelopment of Elephant has completely stalled, the private money has disappeared, the shopping centre is losing money and squeezing its tenants with higher and higher rents, and even the new blue paint job failed as it started raining whilst they were painting it leaving huge drip marks all over it . Then with South Bank University being on the front line to close since fees went up, and some problems with the Heygate rebuild (cant remember what he said about that now), it looks like Elephant will have to be content with its redevelopment consisting of having Britains Ugliest Building... to go with its other ugly buildings.
failed as it started raining whilst they were painting it leaving huge drip marks all over it . Then with South Bank University being on the front line to close since fees went up, and some problems with the Heygate rebuild (cant remember what he said about that now), it looks like Elephant will have to be content with its redevelopment consisting of having Britains Ugliest Building... to go with its other ugly buildings.
Chz
Stark Raving Sane
Pity about the turbines, it was an interesting idea but at least we'll know why no-one else does it in future.
I still like the look of it, and calling skyscrapers "an energy-greedy building form" is pure ignorance (I'd normally expect better out of the Telegraph, but everyone's going down the tubes these days).
I still like the look of it, and calling skyscrapers "an energy-greedy building form" is pure ignorance (I'd normally expect better out of the Telegraph, but everyone's going down the tubes these days).
Chz
Stark Raving Sane
Because they're not. A single block of 400 dwellings should be more efficient in space, power, materials, and more sustainable in general than standard low rise housing provided it's designed properly. This is the key - it's much harder to design a proper high-rise just to keep it energy efficient, let alone prevent it from being a soulless waste. Mainly because few have bothered to before, whereas you can pick up plans for any variety of low-density housing that will fit the bill easily enough.
Chz
Stark Raving Sane
They're more cost-efficient. Above that height, you need to start using different construction methods. The most cost-efficient building is not going to be the most efficient overall though. Obviously when you start getting to Shard height there's some significant engineering costs in the background, but 30-story towers aren't unduly expensive. I used to rather like living on the 22nd floor.
I don't think high-rise residential buildings will ever take off here due to the psychological impact they have. British people, for the most part, just don't like them. Full stop. Maybe that will change, but it's going to be some time.
I don't think high-rise residential buildings will ever take off here due to the psychological impact they have. British people, for the most part, just don't like them. Full stop. Maybe that will change, but it's going to be some time.
teuchter
je suis teuchter
The taller you build, the greater proportion of the building's fabric needs to be devoted to structural support, and the greater proportion of each floor area needs to be devoted to lifts, fire escapes, services and so on. And the more energy is needed to get people and water and everything else from the bottom to the top. Lifts can represent something like 10% of a tall building's energy requirement, I believe.
Seems to me that there are lots of reasons for tall buildings to be more energy intensive - so for them to better or equal the energy use of lower buildings, there would have to be quite a few significant advantages of building tall to balance the equation out. What are they?
All I can think of are efficiencies of scale - but that applies to big buildings, not tall ones specifically.
I'd be interested to see evidence of the energy advantages of building tall.
Seems to me that there are lots of reasons for tall buildings to be more energy intensive - so for them to better or equal the energy use of lower buildings, there would have to be quite a few significant advantages of building tall to balance the equation out. What are they?
All I can think of are efficiencies of scale - but that applies to big buildings, not tall ones specifically.
I'd be interested to see evidence of the energy advantages of building tall.
Chz
Stark Raving Sane
Only in an office block. Residential usage is lower, there are fewer lifts, and they move slower. In addition, any new 6-story block will have lifts and you'll need more blocks and more lifts to cover them. Lifts do not require more energy to travel above a certain height - a dozen lifts moving 6 floors will use the same energy as 3 lifts travelling 24 floors (within a reasonable fudge factor). The main excess is having to keep water pressure at the top, but this is more than offset by the increased thermal efficiency.
Similar threads
