Notre dame
-
I personally would not support allowing the event to be errased by a like for like rebuild. The event should be embeded and read into the timeline of the building. I think it would be criminal to rebuild it would damage the timeline integrity. That is not just my opinion but a universaly accepted fundimental principle of heritage Architecture BTW. and frankly Majid with your qualifications I am at a loss to understand how you do not get that.
-
Not sure exactly what you mean there. Do you suggest that the building should have features that are current with the fire timeline or something else?
For myself, using a glass roof for example, would completely alter the fit of the structure into the community it serves.
-
Excellent as always!
-
Hi Mike, it is a universally accepted fundimental principle of heritage Architecture. The principal was formed to serve the community. I am not saying the answer would be a glass roof, but I am sure the principal would and should apply. The derogitory term for trying to rebuild it "as was" is reffered to as "pastiche"
Oh I forgot to say that is awsome work Jo-ke
-
Just heard a great quote, Rebuilding Notre Dame like for like "would be like trying to reheat a souffle"...........perfect analogy
-
In the case of a soufle one cannot add to it either. So let's have scrambled eggs! But seriously, I understand the point. It's not important to the French as it was, but as it is.
-
@pbacot said:
In the case of a soufle one cannot add to it either. So let's have scrambled eggs! But seriously, I understand the point. It's not important to the French as it was, but as it is.
Touché with the analogy
But I think it wont be scrambled eggs,I have seen this principle applied on other projects and have never seen "scrambled eggs" Anyway that is for people beyond our pay rate to ponder. We will have to wait and see. -
The problem is, as I see it, there is a high degree of risk of ruining the building if modern looks are applied. If you have a fire in your home the insurance company will repair to the prior state, not alter it. If there had been no fire the building would still have the same appearance but probably more likely to fall down.
-
A Cathederal here in Perth Western Australia was in such poor structural condition that it required a major but partial rebuild.
Modern architectural additions were actually engineering imperitives, without which too much of the original building would need to be destroyed to get back the structural integrity for like for like rebuild. I have attached images of the project on completion.
So many people were "up in arms" about the concept (All the armchair Engineers and Architects who were forming petitons and marching in the streets) When it was finished it was loved by everyone
The Architectural company charged with the rebuild will be chosen because they are up to the task, to think they will not consider the matix of Architectural, Engineering and Social elements whatever the considered solution may be. To think otherwise is just ignorance.
You may note in the images the beauty of the building still remains and the timeline integrity is easily read and intact.
-
Modern materials yes, modern styles, NO.
I can see the place for heat and pressure treated wood rather than oak for examle but in this instance, masonry and roof can be rebuilt without modern architectural styles being applied. To do that would be to ruin the building. The majority of the stonework could do with attention but replacement, mais non, merci.
-
a quick try in twinmotion:
-
Nice work Jo-ke
Has motivated me to have a look at Unreal Engine, thanks 
-
That looks great jo-ke!
-
This would be a lot easier to update. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Sagrada_Fam%C3%ADlia
Advertisement