Criterion Place

As this thread disappeared, here's a replacement thread for this important project.

This incredible twin tower scheme originally proposed by Ian Simpson architects as part of a competion for the Criterion Place site has now been approved by the council.

This building will surely put Leeds at the forefront of high rise architecture in the UK and Europe.

Click on the link to see the other buildings that were part of the competition Criterion Place competition (http://www.leeds-cityscape.co.uk/Criterion_Place.htm)

Data

No. of floors - 53
Height - 178m (estimate)
Building type - Mixed use
Year of construction - tba
Architect - Ian Simpson
Location - Leeds city centre

http://www.leeds-developments.connectfree.co.uk/13_10714_is_criterion_view01.jpg

http://www.leeds-cityscape.co.uk/criterion1_large.jpg

http://www.leeds-cityscape.co.uk/criterion2_large.jpg

Its funny that this project has been a bit forgotten as its keeping quiet at the moment- maybe its not keeping quoet, amybe just supertrams more important at the moment!

Whats the status of this tower - I really hope it go's up, its one of my favourite designs out of the many I have seen over the years. A real top draw addition to Leeds skyline if it takes off.:cheers1:

I think its in approval at the moment, under detailed planning to be submitted... Are we expecting a start sometime in 2006? The council probably would give it full planning permission- it chose this design as a winner and had backed it and is pushing it to go ahead (or was when I last heard). Some local organisations are also backing it too because its nearly all benefits. It will bring shops and cafés into the area for city centre residents, and provide more hotel space and prime office space.

Criterion Place is one of my favourites in the UK too :)
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/1004CriterionPlaceresidentialtower_pic2.jpg

I also think there have been 2 extra floors fitted in by changing the beams, but I'm nto sure. I know they were discussing it, dunno if it actually changed, but Simons Estates states 47 and 29 earlier in a piece of text but then states 49 later. Redevelopment of 2.9 acre site in Leeds by Simons Developments Ltd – Criterion Place
Simons Developments Ltd is to redevelop a council-owned site in Leeds as an 800,000 sq ft mixed use scheme. Following a public exhibition of three schemes, Leeds Council approved the appointment of the Lincoln based company. The site covers 2.9 acres at Sovereign Street near the River Aire. Ian Simpson Architects designed the development using two glass towers, one of 47 storeys and the other of 29 storeys, as the centrepiece of the scheme.

The 49-storey tower will provide 326 apartments, basement car parking and 266,000 sq ft of office space. The smaller tower will have a 186-bed hotel with 44,377 sq ft of shops on the ground floor.

A new pedestrian link from the city centre to the river has been included in the scheme.

Peter Batty, Development Director of Simons Developments said "Our proposals are an exciting opportunity to create a showpiece development in the heart of Leeds city centre."

Whichever it is, I think it remains the same actual height at 161m? Sometime like that

Can't wait for this one. I'm sure its a dead cert to be built.


but Simons Estates states 47 and 29 earlier in a piece of text but then states 49 later.

I suspect that the 49 figure includes underground levels too.

I think its in approval at the moment, under detailed planning to be submitted...

You what? You mean: A planning application has not been submitted yet.

yeah I said to be submitted- aka it hasnt been submitted yet but will be in the future, once its been done.

'It's in approval at the moment' is the part that perplexed me.

Ian Simpson have confirmed it at 160m. So I'd wager 47 storeys, 48 max.

I love these towers :happy:


this is a damn good rendering :drool: :master:
http://www.leeds-cityscape.co.uk/criterion1_large.jpg

Good lord - firstly thanks for restarting the thread - it's a truely special scheme. Secondly...... it hasn not been approved. I wish everyone would stop saying so, because it falsely puts us closer to construction etc, which lets face it is still at least a year away.

The council chose the design in a design competition. That's it, period. there has been no pp submitted, no outline pp. That's it. Zip! The council endorsing the design is not the same as planning permission.

We'll known when its officially submitted because I'm sure there will be a press release from Simon's and I'm sure the YEP and YP will pick it up as well. More to the point we'll see it on the Council planning app entries.

I'll post a couple of the photos I took of the hoarding late last year.

.. :|

I love these towers :happy:


this is a damn good rendering :drool: :master:
http://www.leeds-cityscape.co.uk/criterion1_large.jpg
All we would need now would be City House, seen between the two buildings to at least get a makeover.

Can't wait for this one. I'm sure its a dead cert to be built.


I dunno - I don't think people will want to live/work in a building that looks as though it's going to fall over... :runaway:

As is the case with BWP, the renderings don't really give a good indication of the width of CPlace. The model shown at the council exhibition looked very different to the slender towers shown above.

I'd personally love to live in it, the locations great aswell.

These will definitley be two of my favourite skyscrapers if built.

I would think that City House will be recladded or something built to hide it in the future- its one of the few buildings that hasnt been recladded, demolished or has no plans for it.

re: city house
There were rumours it was to be vacated sometime this year. It's had a refit within the last ten years, adding blue cladding and windowframes.

http://www.leodis.org/images/2002910_71906680.jpg

http://www.leeds-cityscape.co.uk/photos/09-04-2005/City%20House%20and%20Station.jpg

# Knock it down, knock it down, knock it down #

Quite possibly my least favourite building in Leeds (and that includes the monstrous turd that is the Yorkshire Post building).

(I was talking about City House, in case my lack of quoting made it unclear :))

(I was talking about City House, in case my lack of quoting made it unclear :))

Well my least favourite Leeds building is that massive brooding hulk - Quarry House. Nicknamed 'The Kremlin' (an insult to the real Kremlin) it was described in an architectural journal as "an architectural disaster which should never be allowed to happen again". Hopefully the forthcoming development of Quarry Hill should mask it at least from its western aspect.

Hurrah - found I had kept these on ImageStation - from about 9 months ago, and still in situ, but goes to show that the developers are cracking on with trying to entice tenants and hotel operators etc. Great hoardings though!

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/7169/Criterion3.jpg

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/1528/Criterion2.jpg

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/2408/Criterion1.jpg

They must build these beauties!! They Must!!! :rant:

Hurrah - found I had kept these on ImageStation - from about 9 months ago, and still in situ, but goes to show that the developers are cracking on with trying to entice tenants and hotel operators etc. Great hoardings though!
I wouldn't be too surprised if Hilton move their hotel across the road into the smaller tower. After all, the bottom 22 or so floors of the Deansgate tower in Manchester will be taken up by Hilton. Such a move would probably mean redevelopment of the vacant Hilton site, which is hardly a beauty.

Hilton have sold that hotel along with 10 others (If my memory serves me well) in order to concentrate on there more upmarket hotels. i posted details after reading about it in Property Week some months ago - but of course that is all lost now.

This may mean that they are even more likely to be looking for a new upmarket location.

I would think that if Hilton were looking for a more upmarket location, it may well be in one of these new developments. Is there a hotel in BWP? or will there be? Hilton already have another hotel in Leeds, but I would guess they would want 1 in Leeds City so I'm sure they may have sold it but are looking for a new location. For Hilton, the current hotel doesnt really represent Hilton's pride.

Crikey, thinking about it those hoardings have almost been up a year now, I can remember trying to steal one when I was drunk, he he!:cheers:

Crikey, thinking about it those hoardings have almost been up a year now, I can remember trying to steal one when I was drunk, he he!:cheers:
Had you pinched one of those hoardings ands erected it near the Peace Gardens in Sheffield, I reckon it would have caused quite a stir, especially in the SCC council chamber and planning department.

I would think that if Hilton were looking for a more upmarket location, it may well be in one of these new developments. Is there a hotel in BWP? or will there be? Hilton already have another hotel in Leeds, but I would guess they would want 1 in Leeds City so I'm sure they may have sold it but are looking for a new location. For Hilton, the current hotel doesnt really represent Hilton's pride.
Maybe an alternative might be in Venture Towers 27-storey smaller brother.

I would think that if Hilton were looking for a more upmarket location, it may well be in one of these new developments. Is there a hotel in BWP? or will there be? Hilton already have another hotel in Leeds, but I would guess they would want 1 in Leeds City so I'm sure they may have sold it but are looking for a new location. For Hilton, the current hotel doesnt really represent Hilton's pride.

Hilton have no pride, they are living off their name. I've stayed in quite a few on business and they've been without exception horrible places. The only upmarket thing about them is the prices!

Had you pinched one of those hoardings ands erected it near the Peace Gardens in Sheffield, I reckon it would have caused quite a stir, especially in the SCC council chamber and planning department.

LOL! yeah I should have done that, the SCC would probably reject Criterion Place stating something like "it would reflect too much light into the Winter Gardens endangering the sensitive species of plants" :hahaha:

any news about criterion place ..its gone very quiet?

any news about criterion place ..its gone very quiet?
indeed - but with a build this complex it takes 18 months to put a full planning app together. I guess because the design was chosen in a competition, ISA (the winners) wouldn't have put much work into a full application until they'd won it. Hopefully, they are working closely with the council to produce a planning application that can get approved in a relatively short time.

With projects this complex though, the whole planning/approval process can - and does - take years. It was estimated the full application might appear towards the end of 2005. Assuming no hiccups it would probably spend 6-12 months in the planning office, so we're not looking at cranes on site for at least 12 months, and most likely early 2007.

Anyhoo, unless someone from ISA is on this forum to leak a wee(!) snippet of info, we're all in the dark until the full application appears in the public domain.

Frustrating but there it is.

I also liked the other Criterion Place scheme (DLA?) The medium sized one- it would be nice to see this scheme built at another site in Leeds. I've heard rumors they were looking for a site because they had spent quite a bit of work on it. I think I might say to only build one of the towers though because there are already Venture and Criterion Place (ISA) twin towers (or will be).

Looking at Manc Beetham and Holloway circus has left me wondering whether Criterion Place/West Point will end up looking like a couple of blue Mr Freeze popsicles, like the kind i used to grab from the bottom of a big chest fridge down High Ash shops.

Does anyone else share my fear?

Looking at Manc Beetham and Holloway circus has left me wondering whether Criterion Place/West Point will end up looking like a couple of blue Mr Freeze popsicles, like the kind i used to grab from the bottom of a big chest fridge down High Ash shops.

Does anyone else share my fear?

yes, but Mr Freeze says 'Chill.............'!

These ISA designs are so unique and different to what we've had so far, well, ice blue asymmetric glass beats terracotta hands down.

I prefer them to Manchester Beetham anyday - a glass cuboid doesn't really float my boat.

Know what you mean- I haven't said it though to avoid the whole city basher thing. Criterion Place are much more imaginative and have an identifiable shape that is far more interesting than the Beetham's, even though they're not exactly ugly.

Know what you mean- I haven't said it though to avoid the whole city basher thing. Criterion Place are much more imaginative and have an identifiable shape that is far more interesting than the Beetham's, even though they're not exactly ugly.

I'm not city bashing. Just because I'm expressing an opinion that I don't much care for anything too boxy, and I prefer slightly more interesting shapes, well, means just that. Criterion Place is truely fantastic and I'm crossing my nuts that the damn thing goes ahead.

no I was reffering to myself- that if I said it all the Mancunians would be so quick to comment I'd hardly have posted it. There are too many boxes being built there anyway IMO.

no I was reffering to myself- that if I said it all the Mancunians would be so quick to comment I'd hardly have posted it. There are too many boxes being built there anyway IMO.

We're wacting Leeds No1!

Be careful, be very careful! :nono:

Well it's true. I never had that much of a negative view of it before I came here.

Know what you mean- I haven't said it though to avoid the whole city basher thing. Criterion Place are much more imaginative and have an identifiable shape that is far more interesting than the Beetham's, even though they're not exactly ugly.


I agree, the only thing going for Beetham's is it's height, the design is less than inspiring. A recent article in the Times on the current trend for cities to build high compared 10 planned/under construction projects and they were not exactly complementary about Beethams but were much more upbeat about Criterion for it's imaginative design.

ffs...

Cracking contribution to the debate fella.

My concern is with the disparity between the stunning renderings and the reality of the cladding. It's not that i don't like either of the current Simpson towers, I do.

Blue-Raspberry flavour

http://www.lowcarbluxury.com/mrfreezepops.jpg

I think beetham manc is great, the pictures in their latest development thread are truely beautifull.

Of course I would prefer CP obviously for the unique design and overal were getting 2 towers out of it, hopefully.

It's bland IMO, stick it is downtown Frankfurt or Chicago and it you would not notice it. I'd say the same if it was built in Leeds, it's got nowt to do with it being built in Manchester. It is visually striking due to it's height, nothing more.

Is this what we want from our skyscrapers in this country? I admit due to cost it is probably what we are going to get and if they are concentrated en masse in one area the visual impact is certainly impressive but when built piecemeal across a city the impact is far, far less impressive unless the actual building have a striking visual design.

^You wouldnt be saying that if it was being built in Leeds...

Oh please grow up, it is impossible to criticise anything in Manchester if you’re from Leeds or vice versa without people from the other city immediately getting some sort of chip on their shoulder?

That’s right if it was being built in Leeds it would be great, visually stunning, an awesome piece of architecture…………….no it wouldn’t it would be the same as it is in Manchester, a 500-odd foot tall box. Such buildings are bland whether they are in Manchester, London, Hong Kong or Leeds, yes Leeds (I dare say we’ll be getting something similar soon enough).

It's bland IMO, stick it is downtown Frankfurt or Chicago and it you would not notice it.

Very true.

What about Birmingham Beetham, you can't call that a box????

But you would notice CP in such cities even if it were surrounded by taller buildings. The design alone is visually impressive and added to this the two towers can play off each other.

Indeed it has been said often enough that the WTC in New York were two of the blandest skyscrapers ever built but the effect was much improved because they could play off against each other.

I certainly wouldn't object to a Beethams in Leeds but I would not praise the design if one were built.

What about Birmingham Beetham, you can't call that a box????

Not seen it but will check it out!

Beetham Manchester is the perfectly designed skyscraper within its context. It sits directly behind and perfectly echos the massive, long rectanglar bulk of the Great Northern Warehouse and also sits at an important intersection of canal, railway, tram line and 3 main roads within the city centre. Its a singularly powerful statement, entirely appropriate to its location and as such its simple form makes complete sense to me. The cantilever at mid height is a simple enough concept (not necessarily an obvious one) but its contribution to its overall aesthetic cannot be under estimated. Everything about this building is powerful, deliberate, unfussy and immaculately thought through. The hotel block podium and office block will tie the tower block in perfectly to surrounding structures too. Wait till its finished. There are other subtleties such as the slightly different cladding to different sides of the building and the added texture that the fins lend to its Eastern elevation that are easy to dismiss from afar.

To describe it as a "box" in a pejorative sense shows a lack of appreciation of the building and the subtle flair within its design. In my view the building displays every bit as much flair as Criterion Place and Simpson's other designs all be it of a different sort. A sort that is entirely suited to location, context and its overall concept. Relocate Criterion Place to Beetham's location and it simply wouldn't work.

Sorry for rattling on. Criterion Place looks great in the renders and I have no doubt it will be stunning in the flesh. Beetham Manchester did not look overly impressive in the renders (it is harder to convey the impact of a cuboid shape than a multifaceted one in a 2D render after all) but it will look every bit as stunning in the flesh - of that I have no doubt.

The criterion towers are certainly a unique design/concept and would grace any city.
For the record, has planning permission/approval been granted yet, and has a start/finish date been assigned?
If these buildings do get the go-ahead they will definitely be ones to monitor their construction like no others because of their shape.
I hope they get a start on them in the near future or all this talk will be for naught.

Beetham Manchester is the perfectly designed skyscraper within its context. It sits directly behind and perfectly echos the massive, long rectanglar bulk of the Great Northern Warehouse and also sits at an important intersection of canal, railway, tram line and 3 main roads within the city centre. Its a singularly powerful statement, entirely appropriate to its location and as such its simple form makes complete sense to me. The cantilever at mid height is a simple enough concept (not necessarily an obvious one) but its contribution to its overall aesthetic cannot be under estimated. Everything about this building is powerful, deliberate, unfussy and immaculately thought through. The hotel block podium and office block will tie the tower block in perfectly to surrounding structures too. Wait till its finished. There are other subtleties such as the slightly different cladding to different sides of the building and the added texture that the fins lend to its Eastern elevation that are easy to dismiss from afar.

To describe it as a "box" in a pejorative sense shows a lack of appreciation of the building and the subtle flair within its design. In my view the building displays every bit as much flair as Criterion Place and Simpson's other designs all be it of a different sort. A sort that is entirely suited to location, context and its overall concept. Relocate Criterion Place to Beetham's location and it simply wouldn't work.

Sorry for rattling on. Criterion Place looks great in the renders and I have no doubt it will be stunning in the flesh. Beetham Manchester did not look overly impressive in the renders (it is harder to convey the impact of a cuboid shape than a multifaceted one in a 2D render after all) but it will look every bit as stunning in the flesh - of that I have no doubt.


That is a fair comment and you have made your point well. A simple design can be powerful and Beetham is a powerful statement due to it's height, nothing more in my book. I don't think it shows as much flair as CP though, doesn’t come close.

Beetham Manchester is the perfectly designed skyscraper within its context. It sits directly behind and perfectly echos the massive, long rectanglar bulk of the Great Northern Warehouse and also sits at an important intersection of canal, railway, tram line and 3 main roads within the city centre. Its a singularly powerful statement, entirely appropriate to its location and as such its simple form makes complete sense to me. The cantilever at mid height is a simple enough concept (not necessarily an obvious one) but its contribution to its overall aesthetic cannot be under estimated. Everything about this building is powerful, deliberate, unfussy and immaculately thought through. The hotel block podium and office block will tie the tower block in perfectly to surrounding structures too. Wait till its finished. There are other subtleties such as the slightly different cladding to different sides of the building and the added texture that the fins lend to its Eastern elevation that are easy to dismiss from afar.

To describe it as a "box" in a pejorative sense shows a lack of appreciation of the building and the subtle flair within its design. In my view the building displays every bit as much flair as Criterion Place and Simpson's other designs all be it of a different sort. A sort that is entirely suited to location, context and its overall concept. Relocate Criterion Place to Beetham's location and it simply wouldn't work.

Sorry for rattling on. Criterion Place looks great in the renders and I have no doubt it will be stunning in the flesh. Beetham Manchester did not look overly impressive in the renders (it is harder to convey the impact of a cuboid shape than a multifaceted one in a 2D render after all) but it will look every bit as stunning in the flesh - of that I have no doubt.

Wow, I'm impressed. Do you work for Ian Simpson, by any chance? :)

I agree with you about the Manchester Beetham, though, and I think it's already a stunner. I also feel that the debate about the relative merits of Beetham and Criterion Place is sterile and pointless. Any point in crossing my fingers that it goes no further?

Nowt wrong with debating the relative merits of buildings/design as long as folk keep it sensible. Far from sterile and pointless, unless you consider all debates as such!

I play Devils advocate and ask if Beethams was half the height would folk be raving about the design then? I agree it is an impressive building due to it’s height, after all it is the first proper skyscraper outside London but nothing will convince me the design is either innovative or exciting, each to their own though and if we all agreed life would be boring! Sleepyone makes valid points about the design fitting the location which I accept but that doesn’t make the design any different.

I think the novelty of these skyscrapers and the fact they add some height to our cities is what is turning many people on, I suspect many don’t look beyond the headline ‘40/50/60 storey tower planned for X-Ville’. 20/30 years down the line when the novelty value has worn off will we look back in regret at many of them? Maybe not but it is a point worth considering and many commentators on the new desire to build high have expressed similar concerns.

Nowt wrong with debating the relative merits of buildings/design as long as folk keep it sensible. Far from sterile and pointless, unless you consider all debates as such!

I play Devils advocate and ask if Beethams was half the height would folk be raving about the design then? I agree it is an impressive building due to it’s height, after all it is the first proper skyscraper outside London but nothing will convince me the design is either innovative or exciting, each to their own though and if we all agreed life would be boring! Sleepyone makes valid points about the design fitting the location which I accept but that doesn’t make the design any different.

I think the novelty of these skyscrapers and the fact they add some height to our cities is what is turning many people on, I suspect many don’t look beyond the headline ‘40/50/60 storey tower planned for X-Ville’. 20/30 years down the line when the novelty value has worn off will we look back in regret at many of them? Maybe not but it is a point worth considering and many commentators on the new desire to build high have expressed similar concerns.
You make some valid points there and at least admit is an impresssive building.OK you dont like the design but many do including me. Have you actually seen it in the flesh recently? Walking down deansgate it is a jaw dropping sight ,no photos on this forum do justice to the scale of it.The cladding in particular looks crystaline sharp and cutting when you see it up close which complments the slab effect. Wait till is complete and make a visit to it ...stand at the bottom of Deansgate and look up, you can't fail to be impressed. BTW people keep saying how insignificant it would look in places like NY but dont forget the Beetham is approx 20M taller than the United Nations tower and that can be seen on the skyline no problem...at least if you know what it looks like.

Guys, Beetham Manchester is looking awesome, slender but strong, it's really great. If it was half the height would we be raving about the design? Hmm, dunno. If kiera knightly was 3' 11" would she be sexy, I just don't know, possibly. But in it's context, it looks way better then even I ever thought it would.

Criterion place, to me, could well be the next step for ISA, and yes, I think I prefer it to Beetham Manc. It seems fantastical, too good to be true almost. And therein lies the problem. Is it? Once somebody sticks a spade in the ground the competition can start, and I think Criterion will win! It's an awesome looking structure. But until that moment Beetham Manc can't be criticised as not being as nice as Criterion, as one is made out of glass and concrete and the other paper and plans.

Anyhow, I seriously hope this gets built, imagine the fascination watching it go up.

You make some valid points there and at least admit is an impresssive building.OK you dont like the design but many do including me. Have you actually seen it in the flesh recently? Walking down deansgate it is a jaw dropping sight ,no photos on this forum do justice to the scale of it.The cladding in particular looks crystaline sharp and cutting when you see it up close which complments the slab effect. Wait till is complete and make a visit to it ...stand at the bottom of Deansgate and look up, you can't fail to be impressed. BTW people keep saying how insignificant it would look in places like NY but dont forget the Beetham is approx 20M taller than the United Nations tower and that can be seen on the skyline no problem...at least if you know what it looks like.


I dare say I would be impressed, by it's height. Much as the WTC impressed me despite them being two of the blandest skyscrapers ever built on the face of this earth.

The point on it being anonymous in places likes New York or Chicago is that these cities are full of these 'box' type (sorry to use that word again) structures, it would just be another. It is not a case of it being noticeable on the skyline but the design that draws your attention. Lets face it anything less than 900/1000ft tall in NY or Chicago is going to be an anonymous building unless it's design catches your eye. CP is different and ok I admit it is just a plan at the moment.

I hope it gets built. It looks great. Ive been goin Leeds regularly now for the past 2 years due to my girlfriend doing art, and I must say, its a great city and something like CP is well overdue.

Although I like the clean, no nonsense style of Beetham I think criterion is a stunning design. I get the feeling that some people on these forums get a little jealous when they see a great scraper (or any other building) go up in another city ...I am not pointing out any particular person or particular threads here. Why should this be so? Although I have Manchester at heart I would really really like to see this go up in Leeds ...another coup for the North! and at least we can say Leeds best building was designed by a Manc...oops :runaway:

and at least we can say Leeds best building was designed by a Manc...oops

And yet, Cuthbert Brodrick was from Hull, and therefore a Yorkshireman.

If you want my opinion, I think City One will be ebtter than Criterion. City One has more going for it in facilities and things, even if CP is taller and of unique design.

And yet, Cuthbert Brodrick was from Hull, and therefore a Yorkshireman.
OK best tower then

If you want my opinion, I think City One will be ebtter than Criterion. City One has more going for it in facilities and things, even if CP is taller and of unique design.

no one ever wants your opinion LN1

If you want my opinion, I think City One will be ebtter than Criterion. City One has more going for it in facilities and things, even if CP is taller and of unique design.

clang - sorry mate - respect your opinion but disagree vehmently. CP's location is critical, City One is out of the city centre on the outskirts of HUV. City One's original design was a cross between the Jetsons and Futurama. Since then we're seen nothing apart from a rumour that the tower height has increased and Carey Jones have got involved. There's been nothing for us to really debate. Add to that CABE gave the new design a veritable thumbs down also suggests that its not going to be class apart. If the developers aren't prepared to put a few renders out into the public to gauge an opinion then I suggest they aren't that confident in it themselves. Especially after CABE's spanking.

CP is the key to the city centre - apartments, hotel, offices, shops, proper mixed use in one of the best locations available. Add to that the ISA design concept and I can see why the council picked it. D'ya no listen to Kirsty and Phil..... location location location!

Well sometimes I watch location location location... However, I think City One will be more in the centre when it gets built as the financial district is expanding south of the river now. CP however I would rather see built to fill in that empty space of the city centre, and would look great in proximity to BWP. My opinion is, is that CP would be great, and provide a hub for that area, but then again I suppose BWP is literally across the road. It will look great... Imagine entering the city in 2010 from the south- city one, BWP, CP and others possibly. (well hopefully they'll be there).

The site of City One (Sweet Street) will never be in the 'city centre'. Crikey man, HUV will be a fantastic project as it gets going, but there is really no chance of the centre 'relocating' or migrating south of the river.

no but it's more central than it used to be. About 10 years ago nobody would have thought of locating large projects like BWP south of the river.

no but it's more central than it used to be. About 10 years ago nobody would have thought of locating large projects like BWP south of the river.

You mean like the Asda Head Office?

Well that would be one example, but then Bridgewater Place will provide a business hub and encourage more business in that area. Incase you haven't noticed the whole city centre is expanding- to the south and west there are new office and residential masterplans- Whitehall Quays and the riverside is the perfect place for it, and to the east shopping and leisure is expanding with Clarence Dock and Quarry Hill.

Pensions Trust, Halifax, Natwest, Yorkshire Forward, Yorkshire Bank, Dpt of Work and Pensions, Transco, ASDA and soon Eversheds are all south of the river. Just over the river is BT and KPMG. Things like Brewery Wharf are also encouraging further growth and there are lots of new offices around here, such as Leeds City Office Park, which proves there is new interest in this area.

I think the towers look beautiful/modern/chic/like iceicles and they look like amazing renders!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Incase you haven't noticed the whole city centre is expanding- to the south and west there are new office and residential masterplans- Whitehall Quays and the riverside is the perfect place for it, and to the east shopping and leisure is expanding with Clarence Dock and Quarry Hill.

Funny you should say that No.1 - I think I might have noticed, and I think I might also have spent considerable time walking the city and taking a shed load of images to document the very transformation we're talking about. Coming from someone who once queried how to get to Canal Basin from the railway station I think its a bit rich!

The comment about Asda referred to the fact that yes, 10 years there were big projects south of the river, and that BWP on its own (in addition to Halifax / YF etc does not automatically mean the city centre is tranferring south. South of the river will grow, hopefully with a mix of commercial, residential and retail uses, but I don't think that it will become the true heart of the city, more an annex or fringe. I think it will be a bit like Brindley Place in Birmingham - a massive regeneration scheme around the old canal basin which is a mix of resi, commercial (we have offices there) and leisure usage. However, nice, modern and shiny though it is, its a good 10 minute walk from the core city centre around Victoria Square. Its a good addition to the city fringe, and in a similar way to locations like Wellington Place and Fletcher's City One I don't believe it can really be classified as part of the 'true' core city centre.

I'm bored with this already - its a case of semantics.

Pensions Trust, Halifax, Natwest, Yorkshire Forward, Yorkshire Bank, Dpt of Work and Pensions, Transco, ASDA and soon Eversheds are all south of the river. Just over the river is BT and KPMG. Things like Brewery Wharf are also encouraging further growth and there are lots of new offices around here, such as Leeds City Office Park, which proves there is new interest in this area.


You’re right that the only way the CBD can really expand is to the south. That said the main focus will always be north of the river and railway line which both form a barrier to access to the south. This is even more pronounced in the retail sector and I doubt much major retail business will ever open south of the river. I don’t think you can really class HUV as being part of the CBD and it would take major expansion south for it to be classed as part of it which I cannot see happening in the near future.

I can’t agree that City One has more going for it, like Jimbo says CP location is ideal, right next to the station and towering above the southern road approaches to the city centre. It is THE prime vacant site in Leeds.

Is Criterion Place the new Brick Man???

Nowt wrong with debating the relative merits of buildings/design as long as folk keep it sensible. Far from sterile and pointless, unless you consider all debates as such!

You're quite right, mister, and I expressed myself badly. I think what was making me nervous was the age old Leeds/Manchester feud, which seems to fill the heads of a couple of forumers. However, there have been lots of interesting points raised, such as the comparisons with buildings in cities like New York. I particularly agree with the point you made about the need to consider the quality of design instead of getting carried away by the height of proposals. Going off at a complete tangent, I've visited Rome which is dominated by its churches and palazzi. Very often, though, it is the more unassuming buildings which stick in the mind, rather than the biggest, most grandiose buildings. And the reason, to my mind at least, is because they respond best to their context. So they fit well with where they're sited, and they are a delight to the eye at the same time.

OK, enough with the pretentious wank. Enjoy the weekend!

Interesting posts left on the 'Leeds Cityscape' site.
21 months now since the exhibition for Criterion Place at the Civic Hall

Re: Criterion, Leeds - three contenders left !
« Reply #355 on Nov 20, 2005, 5:05am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The word from sources close to the developer is that the scheme for Criterion Place in it's present form is dead. I expect the scheme to re surface with major modifications once the re design is complete. I understand the the cantilievered floor slab structure, required to give the scheme it's destinctive shape, was too expensive. In addition to this the foundation design was fraught with problems. The next significant scheme to commence in the City will be the 52 storey Venture Tower. Negotiations are currently ongoing with the City Council to start this project in the summer of 2006.
Logged


Guest
Guest
Re: Criterion, Leeds - three contenders left !
« Reply #356 on Nov 23, 2005, 3:15am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know the guy incharge of this, and he says that it is not dead at all, but they want to change the beams. If the beams are changed, partly for financial reasons, 2 extra floors can be fitted in. So this is probably why.
Logged


Nigle
Guest
Re: Criterion, Leeds - three contenders left !
« Reply #357 on Nov 23, 2005, 9:09am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Great news! So does that mean we can expect a design and hight similar to that originally proposed?
Logged


Guest
Guest
Re: Criterion, Leeds - three contenders left !
« Reply #358 on Nov 23, 2005, 12:33pm »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Yes. I don't know of any major change in design, but obviously some modifications would need to be made with 2 extra floors and different beams.

http://www.thechristadelphians.org/forums/style_emoticons/default/mf_popcorn1.gif

Guest
Guest
Re: Criterion, Leeds - three contenders left !
« Reply #356 on Nov 23, 2005, 3:15am »

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I know the guy incharge of this, and he says that it is not dead at all, but they want to change the beams. If the beams are changed, partly for financial reasons, 2 extra floors can be fitted in. So this is probably why.
Logged


Surely that post was fron LNo.1 who has posted this comment a few times on this site?

Now, now, ladies.....

I adore this development and would def pay Leeds a visit to see this unique and beautiful structure. For some reason it blends a Britishness with a futuristic vision rarely seen

First one was, second wasn't... I don't know much other news though, but its not an increase in height, just fitting in 2 extra floors if beams are changed. He's one of my friends dad's, works in Horsforth, don't know who for though, rarely see him... But he's got like 200 images of renders and plans on his computer apparently... Would like to see them!

I adore this development and would def pay Leeds a visit to see this unique and beautiful structure. For some reason it blends a Britishness with a futuristic vision rarely seen

Cheers for that potto. I don't think many Leeds forumers could believe it when this appeared nearly two years ago, but sadly, we now understand what a 'design competition' actually means. Just that. A chance for speedy development it is not. It would be tragic for the design to change, which you quite rightly say is truely unique and futuristic (definately more elegant and beautiful than the London Beetham, although with similar cantilever style).

I truely fear that what would be the pinnacle of the Leeds skyline, and a true counterpoint to the maligned 1980-1990s Leeds Look, will not see the light of day.

I went to a lecture last night with Ian Simpson as one of the guest speakers. He mentioned this development and said that they were preparing detailed planning drawings for the scheme. He also said the visuals did not show the scheme as high as it should be so whether that means an increase in height and they are ammending the drawings for this I do not know. However he did say Leeds City Council were 100% behind the scheme and eager for it to go ahead. Ian Simpson himself came across as very much a champion of tall buildings and I'm sure he has been pushing the council all the way with this, particularly citing his other creation that looms over Manchester and the impact that has had for the city.

On another note he also quickly showed some renders of his scheme for KW Linfoot. Let me tell you they really are big buildings and loomed over the city from the viewpoints shown

I went to a lecture last night with Ian Simpson as one of the guest speakers. He mentioned this development and said that they were preparing detailed planning drawings for the scheme. He also said the visuals did not show the scheme as high as it should be so whether that means an increase in height and they are ammending the drawings for this I do not know. However he did say Leeds City Council were 100% behind the scheme and eager for it to go ahead. Ian Simpson himself came across as very much a champion of tall buildings and I'm sure he has been pushing the council all the way with this, particularly citing his other creation that looms over Manchester and the impact that has had for the city.

thanks for that larven, pretty much the first ACTUAL piece of reliable news we've had in ages. Don't doubt that the council are supportive, its whether the developer is large enough and committed enough to come through on such a huge scheme. Absolutely same issue for Linfoot plc and West Point/Venture Tower.

Subtract on the Manc boards had the inside line on ISA, but like Britannia he's stopped posting. We really need some tangible info from Simons Estates! Could be that we are surprised by the sudden submission of a full planning app, which means ISA will be busy on Leeds schemes at the moment with Venture Tower (s) also supposed to be submitting at any time.

I feel like an impatient 5 year old, but as di Livio (he's looking like Barty Crouch junior now?!?!), its 21 months since the competition was won without any tangible information. Bah.

Well as he said there are preparing detailed planning drawings when it has already been approved perhaps there are some alterations to the design that they have to go back to the planners with. As he hinted at the increase in height who knows, maybe we could all be in for a pleasant surprise. :)

Do you think the height increase refers to the extra 2 storeys or something bigger :O

A 60 storey version would be very nice indeed :)

It hasn't been approved in detail, only in concept. There hasn't been any formal planning application, not even an outline application. However, it is approved in principle so the outline stage should be satisfied.

The next stage will be a fully detailed application, and that level takes a lot of work and many months to reach. But hopefully, what we have now heard from Ian Simpson's Architects suggests that this stage is being worked towards.

Well as he said there are preparing detailed planning drawings when it has already been approved perhaps there are some alterations to the design that they have to go back to the planners with. As he hinted at the increase in height who knows, maybe we could all be in for a pleasant surprise. :)

A height increase would indeed be excellent, say something over 171m, taking it higher than a certain you know where in Manc ;) I've checked out lots of the proposals lodged at the Planning Office on Rossington Street and again can categorically say that Criterion Place has not yet been submitted. The moment it is, we need someone to get down there quick smart as I'm sure the application pack will have loads of new images and renders for us to salivate over.

.. :doh:

Looks like a greeat project for Leeds, hopes it gets to it.

Those towers would look fantastic on Lliverpool's waterfront. There's lots of land in Liverpool where these two towers could be built. Leeds is luck to have such an inconic scheme. Ian Simpson is one of the best architects around.

Those towers would look fantastic on Lliverpool's waterfront. There's lots of land in Liverpool where these two towers could be built. Leeds is luck to have such an inconic scheme. Ian Simpson is one of the best architects around.

Liverpool did have its own iconic Ian Simpson scheme. Granted it would have looked fantastic on the waterfront but the council didn't think so.

Liverpool did have its own iconic Ian Simpson scheme. Granted it would have looked fantastic on the waterfront but the council didn't think so.

Similarly, Norman Foster's 'ark' was clearly the most attractive design for the 4th grace competition 'won' by Alsop.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/liverpool/features/2002/08/fourth_grace/foster.jpg

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/4th_grace_foster2.jpg

Agreed....very futuristic looking providing a great contrast with the 3 graces, much better than Alsops curly wurly dog turd..

Anyway back to Criterion.....

Hi, as I said I kinda know a guy involved in this, I don't know exactly what he does though, but he works in Horsforth... But today he gave me a CD about Criterion Place, and it has a 27 page brochure about it. It's got the floor plans for every floor, all the specifications, loads of renders, models...etc- lots of stuff which would probably interest you. It's from December 2003 though, but I don't think that makes the information any more irrelevant than we think it might be. I don't think this has been cancelled at all.

How do I upload it? Its a PDF file, 10MB...

ooooh sounds interesting!!
You'd have to rip images out of it and load one by one, I don't think the 'attachment' facility is operational on SSC boards.

Hmm yeah. I know, I'll get the images and upload them over a period of time seeing as theres loads. Or I might spend tonight doing it I dunno heh.

A few basica facts though, might have already known
There are 2 private courtyards in the centre of the 2 podiums, that are quite large, larger than the images I've seen so far make out. If it goes ahead, the viaduct and arches behind it will be improved and renovated, and new links to open Criterion Place up to City Square by renovating the area under the arches. The 47th floor of the residential tower will have a garden (more than double height of the other floors tapering to 160m), and the 29th of the hotel will have a viewing platform. Residential units will range from one bed to three bed and duplexes on the 45th and 46th floor. They will come in 3 sizes, small, medium and large.

Hmm yeah. I know, I'll get the images and upload them over a period of time seeing as theres loads. Or I might spend tonight doing it I dunno heh.

A few basica facts though, might have already known
There are 2 private courtyards in the centre of the 2 podiums, that are quite large, larger than the images I've seen so far make out. If it goes ahead, the viaduct and arches behind it will be improved and renovated, and new links to open Criterion Place up to City Square by renovating the area under the arches. The 47th floor of the residential tower will have a garden (more than double height of the other floors tapering to 160m), and the 29th of the hotel will have a viewing platform. Residential units will range from one bed to three bed and duplexes on the 45th and 46th floor. They will come in 3 sizes, small, medium and large.

You could use You Send It (http://www.yousendit.com/) for the PDF file and post a download link here? Have there been rumors that this has been cancelled?

Yeah I might do that, but I just got some images from it, well most the images. I will get the floorplans later. So the images I just got I'll post now. There were rumors it might have been cancelled because of the lack of information, but they were no more than rumors that were on this board only.

http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/1931/criterionplace12rs.jpg
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/9479/criterionplace28nv.jpg
http://img389.imageshack.us/img389/4724/criterionplace34sc.jpg

http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/4527/criterionplace45yd.jpg
http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/8329/criterionplace51vx.jpg
http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/2530/criterionplace64qq.jpg
http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/6161/criterionplace75gn.jpg

http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/1763/criterionplace81pc.jpg http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/2342/criterionplace91vp.jpg
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/7340/criterionplace102pv.jpg

http://img381.imageshack.us/img381/1763/criterionplace81pc.jpg
http://img399.imageshack.us/img399/7340/criterionplace102pv.jpg

great work, but any idea why the hotels height keeps varying from image to image? :crazy2:

I dunno, I didn't do them. I will post all the rest tommorow. As I found out today from the plans, I saw that the hotel tower was further south than the main tower, which was a bit further up. So this could partly explain it, although I do see your point. But I dont really know, didnt make them...

Good work Leeds No.1. I'm looking forward to seeing tomorrows wave of pictures.

Those pictures make me want to see this tower built even more, it's amazing.

It would be wonderful if we had these two, and the twin venture towers on the skyline. I'm becoming increasingley skeptical about the project though.

What's the sq footage of the top penthouse Leeds No.1? It should give us an indication of its price, on the 47th floor the price should be at least £350/sq ft.

This scheme encompasses the arches under the railway. One if its main aims is to make better links with the city centre. The arches interconnect to form a 'sculpture park' as they describe, that is well lit and a good urban space for the city. The 'Spine' runs from an urban square through the 'arcade' and the scheme into the front square. Boutiques, cafes and restaurants overflow onto the spine and the squares. There will be a casino on the 4th and 5th floor of the hotel podium. Underneath this will be retail space. A large car park will span the footprint underground. There are 186 bedrooms in the hotel and the total hotel gross is 101, 485 sq ft. The total retail space is 23,372 sq ft. Total office space is 139, 857 sq ft. 6780 sq. ft accounts for residential, hotel is 5236 sq. ft. Those are in the podiums NOT the tower. The larger tower is 306, 516 sq. ft and the hotel tower is 101, 485 sq. ft

(I wish it was metric!)

The whole development:
TOTAL: 787, 749 sq. ft

I'll read up and let you know late, g2g now. Theres loads of text and tables...etc

Hi, as I said I kinda know a guy involved in this, I don't know exactly what he does though, but he works in Horsforth...

Are the images anything to do with Ian Denby Ltd ? Is the guy who gave you the images from there ?

It's the only company in Horsforth that I can think would be involved in a project like this.

Good to see new images, even if they're not new .. if you get my meaning.

Thanks for those LN1, very nice.

great work, but any idea why the hotels height keeps varying from image to image? :crazy2:

Perspective.

This scheme encompasses the arches under the railway. One if its main aims is to make better links with the city centre. The arches interconnect to form a 'sculpture park' as they describe, that is well lit and a good urban space for the city. The 'Spine' runs from an urban square through the 'arcade' and the scheme into the front square. Boutiques, cafes and restaurants overflow onto the spine and the squares. There will be a casino on the 4th and 5th floor of the hotel podium. Underneath this will be retail space. A large car park will span the footprint underground. There are 186 bedrooms in the hotel and the total hotel gross is 101, 485 sq ft. The total retail space is 23,372 sq ft. Total office space is 139, 857 sq ft. 6780 sq. ft accounts for residential, hotel is 5236 sq. ft. Those are in the podiums NOT the tower. The larger tower is 306, 516 sq. ft and the hotel tower is 101, 485 sq. ft

(I wish it was metric!)

The whole development:
TOTAL: 787, 749 sq. ft

Great turn up Leeds No1! Well done. You can see that a number of those concept elevations have ended up as the official renders as seen on the hoardings. Shame its from Dec 2003. It must be Ian Denby, he's the cat for all these render type things, especially Clarence Dock and Whitehall Riverside....Ian Denby (http://www.idenby.co.uk/)

I still don't think we're going to see this one actually come to fruition, despite the optimism shown on the boards. Surely the developer would have at least tried to obtain planning permission by now having unveiled the scheme over a year and half back.
Its so frustrating. Arrgghh :bash:

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/2408/Criterion1.jpg

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/1528/Criterion2.jpg

http://img54.imageshack.us/img54/7169/Criterion3.jpg

One would hope that when Bridgewater is complete the other biggies will get into gear in a race to be Leeds' tallest.

don't panic jimbo!!!

the complexity of a planning application this large is formidable - you read the london threads and these large schemes can take years before breaking ground.

i think this will happen.

don't panic jimbo!!!

the complexity of a planning application this large is formidable - you read the london threads and these large schemes can take years before breaking ground.

i think this will happen.

I know I know. the lack of news annoys me. I seem to have an impending sense of doom for certain projects.....Mayfair, CP etc.

It shouldn't be as complicated as most of the London schemes though. The site is clear, no sitting tenants, ala most of the London project sites. Working up a planning app is a big job though I admit. No English Heritage to oppose though. Pah, show me the planning app, then I'll have a bit more faith!!!!!!

Wahey, cheers no1, you're a star. Those are some purdy pics.

No 1 - those pics are superb. It really gives a feel of how it will look in situ surrounded by all the other landmarks in the area.

I recken 2006 will be the year this monster gets off the ground- well through planning maybe!!

Well done, no.1.
To use your own terminology, 'Sexilicious' pics

£/sqft is more likely to be around the £450 mark for the top floors, small bed smart pads may be even more.
I doubt these levels are sustainable, even if they are acheivable in the first investor flurry of purchases.

I really don't know the company he works for, I will try and find out. It might be Iain Denby. Yes thats where I got the pictures, they're part of a PDF file which is a brochure made by Ian Simpson Architects. It has those images, floor plans, and general text about the developlment (not much new information). The floor plans for every floor are pretty repetitive, except the podium levels. I will post one or two of the floor plans for the tower later, maybe tonight. The only new information I gathered was that the scheme involved renovating the arches into a public gallery and opening it up as a link to City Square.

http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/6750/criterionplan10je.jpg
http://img28.imageshack.us/my.php?image=criterionplan28gc.jpg
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/8923/criterionplan37ax.jpg
http://img28.imageshack.us/img28/8161/criterionplan42tj.jpg

It's like the developers are saying to the rest "beat this suckers!"

I realy think this is one of the best planned developements I know of. I know the location, but not that well so I could be wrong, but it seems perfect to me. It's the correct use and they look gorgeous. Fingers crossed.

In terms of images and diagrams I think these are pretty much the last ones. I have only used two of the floor plans for the tower, they are all quite similar, little variation. Theres like 2 pages of the same thing lol.

Btw, Sexilicious is a good word :)

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/723/criteriontowerplan16vb.jpg The skyscrapers illustrating the use of each floor.
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/4705/criteriontowerplan26ku.jpg
This happens to be floor 27 (I think). Whichever it is anyway, they are all the same in terms of layout and use, only a few rooms slightly larger than others because of the way it tapers in and out.
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/8169/criteriontowerplan30ic.jpg Just a key to what everything is.
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/6708/criteriontowerplan46cv.jpg Level 47 will feature an indoor garden. The viewing platform on level 29 in the hotel tower is literally an open indoor space, the floor plans show no seating, toilets, cafés or anything else, just an open space.

http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/8388/criteriontowerplan51mr.jpg
http://img519.imageshack.us/img519/5509/criteriontowerplan65ij.jpg
All the sizes of everything for you people who are interested.

If anyone wants the full PDF file, PM me your email, I'll send it. The core bits are on here, the rest is jsut text promoting the development that we've already heard.

I seriously hope this happens, it's a cracking development.

I must be alone here, but the whole development looks like the result of someone dropping a glass.

Modern - YES
Impressive Height - YES
Attractive - FUCK NO :no:

this has to be built, its deffinately very classy, very leeds and one of the most stunning pieces of architecture i have ever seen

I would have liked to have seen some tapering toward the top of the tower from the West(?) views, they look quite blocky. Not as good as the 'main' view.

Attractive - FUCK NO :no:

Less attractive than the boxy Conran Tower, which has been so enthusiastically embraced in Sheffield?

I like these towers more then I did previously, although still stunning they were too slim to seem realistic (and everyone doubted whether they would fall over if built) now weve seen more renders of the project It seems far more bulky looking at it from different angles, but what Im more excited about is linking up city square through that god afful tunel, this place will be amazing if its all linked up nicely, the two towers are just a massive bonus in my opinion.

Lets hope they get permission along with Venture!

I must be alone here

Yep. Have you no sense of aesthetics man? :bash:

leeds no1. will you email me the pdf please?

I'll try, I had a bit of trouble trying to send it to Stig- if I can't would it be OK to basically screen shot each page so that you can see the text and then send it? I'll try te PDF first though

http://i5.photobucket.com/albums/y187/rob*******1/DSCF1334.jpg

I was in town today- is this going ahead or what?

Isnt that a new hoarding?

Isnt that a new hoarding?

I saw this about 3 months ago Accy- not sure how long it's been there for though- or what it means in terms of planning permission. It will be a great addition to Leeds though.

Less attractive than the boxy Conran Tower, which has been so enthusiastically embraced in Sheffield?

Criterion has also been designed with nothing more than a straight edge and looks far less colourful. The Conran Tower is more conventionally designed in terms of shape and using Conran's own words, is designed 'to be timeless'.

Two sharp pieces of broken glass in that location (Sheffield) would detract attention away from the Town Hall - the more conventional design allows it to be more of a backdrop when looking at the town hall, but at the same time be an imposing, landmark building for those looking at it from the train station.

I wont be budged on this, Criterion is a poor man's LBT and it looks crap. Hopefully the lower level activity will do the scheme some justice.

Dinp,

I used the Conran Tower in a development control assignment for Ted Kitchen.

I'd say Criterion Place is a damn sight more original in appearance- and will also have a bigger impact due to its extra 15 storeys. I suspect Criterion will blend with the sky to some extent due to its reflective surfaces.- this may lessen its impact on the skyline in certain conditions. I can see it looking amazing from a distance though.

The Conran looks good, but I'd say the square block design, although slender, is nothing special. Its height is its redeeming feature. The materials are more traditional too- like what you'd see on a lot of other loft-style apartments.

Dinp,

I used the Conran Tower in a development control assignment for Ted Kitchen.

I'd say Criterion Place is a damn sight more original in appearance

And I would agree. But it still looks like it took no more than a minute to design. Ted seems a decent bloke. Him and Dick Schneider gave us a talk before Christmas, we seemed to be on the same wavelength, I asked him a few questions.

and will also have a bigger impact due to its extra 15 storeys. I suspect Criterion will blend with the sky to some extent due to its reflective surfaces.- this may lessen its impact on the skyline in certain conditions. I can see it looking amazing from a distance though.

So it'll have a bigger impact, but the impact will be lessened? Make your mind up.

I'm not too clued up on the topography of the area around Criterion, but the Conran tower is perched at the top of a hill so from Sheffield train station, which is at the bottom of this hill, you could fit at least a 7-storey office block inbetween the two. That's the impact it will have from that side. Bear in mind also that Sheffield has very few tall buildings, so its impact will be even greater.

The Conran looks good, but I'd say the square block design, although slender, is nothing special. Its height is its redeeming feature. The materials are more traditional too- like what you'd see on a lot of other loft-style apartments.

If I was the DC officer and I had two applications for the Conran site - Criterion and Conran, I would reject Criterion for the reasons mentioned in my last post. The Conran building fits in well with surrounding buildings (Owen Building, St Pauls Place, Stoddart Building, Derwent/Howden/Redvers Houses) but manages to stand out, without offending anyone.

In case you haven't checked recently, look at the designs on the Sheffield Metro Section. Yes it is more blocky than Criterion, but it is not A BLOCK. Its a good building and as my friend has just rightly pointed out, "interesting doesn't equal good or pleasing to the eye"

Well it is impossible for us to agree on an aesthetic judgement- it is entiredly subjective. In the grand scheme of things, Criterion is a far more unique design, and in my personal opinion will give visitors something that is different to what they have seen elsewhere.

Also, Conran will offend some people. It was thrown out by the planning committee in its initial application and on the second time round attracted 65 letters of opposition from the public- against 1 that was in favour. It was also opposed by the Victorian Society and CABE (who believe in such a prominent location it should use superior materials.)
The blockiness depends on the elevation. The main face is undoubtedly a block- a massive rectangle shape. It is only slender from a 'side ways' elevation.

I'm glad it was granted permission, and personally I like it. But in my subjective judgement, Criterion is something much more special... although if Liverpool's Brunswick Quay is granted in an ensuing planning inquiry then it may not be as unique anymore.- I think there is a biggy in London also designed by Simpson (-or of that genre anyway.)

Well it is impossible for us to agree on an aesthetic judgement- it is entiredly subjective. In the grand scheme of things, Criterion is a far more unique design, and in my personal opinion will give visitors something that is different to what they have seen elsewhere.

It seems i'm agreeing to disagree with almost everyone on this, but fair enough, each to their own. It is a far more unique design I grant you and it'll certainly have more visitors talking about it than the Sheffield tower will, because that one will stimulate little talk.

To compare Criterion with Conran is daft though (I know it wasnt you who did) and equally, to compare Sheffield and Leeds is also daft. Sheffield is at an earlier stage of its renaissance than Leeds, which a few years ago would also be praising projects similar to Conran in its own city.

I'm not deliberately stirring up shit, I just cannot like Criterion. I think it is foolishly designed, gimmicky and will date very badly. Others think otherwise and I can accept that, I just dont agree with them.

Also, Conran will offend some people. It was thrown out by the planning committee in its initial application and on the second time round attracted 65 letters of opposition from the public- against 1 that was in favour. It was also opposed by the Victorian Society and CABE (who believe in such a prominent location it should use superior materials.)
The blockiness depends on the elevation. The main face is undoubtedly a block- a massive rectangle shape. It is only slender from a 'side ways' elevation.

I'm glad it was granted permission, and personally I like it. But in my subjective judgement, Criterion is something much more special... although if Liverpool's Brunswick Quay is granted in an ensuing planning inquiry then it may not be as unique anymore.- I think there is a biggy in London also designed by Simpson (-or of that genre anyway.)

I dont know if this is a Sheffield-only thing, but people seem to moan about anything and everything to do with planning there. I'll know the answer to this question as my career progresses, but no planning committee in their right mind would have approved Conran if it was adversely affecting the Winter Garden, which is what many of the letters of objection will have been about and which is why the first application was rightly turned down.

The improvements addressed many, if not all of the issues though and as such it was rightly approved second time round.

When Sheffield gets striking designs like Criterion, I will be critical when they are crap. I'm not into this City V City shit - I would have disliked Criterion no matter what city they put it in. It has all the elegance of a broken window.

:no:

will date very badly. :

This could be a problem. Only time will tell. Although, I think the way it ages will depend on the quality and endurance of the materials used. It will probably look dated at some point, and will then later acquie a retro chique value to it. This is the way of things- fashions and all.

This could be a problem. Only time will tell. Although, I think the way it ages will depend on the quality and endurance of the materials used. It will probably look dated at some point, and will then later acquie a retro chique value to it. This is the way of things- fashions and all.

True, although some will argue that most things built in the 60s and 70s will never come into fashion ever again :lol:

It has all the elegance of a broken window.

Well, i think you're utterly deluded.

Each to his own.

Well, i think you're utterly deluded.

Each to his own.

Cheers :cheers:

True, although some will argue that most things built in the 60s and 70s will never come into fashion ever again :lol:

They are already back in fashion- those that were well designed and used decent materials. The Trellick Tower in London is well sought after and the Barbican is much loved too for its quirkyness. Both were despised for a long, long time.

They are already back in fashion- those that were well designed and used decent materials. The Trellick Tower in London is well sought after and the Barbican is much loved too for its quirkyness. Both were despised for a long, long time.

I'm being pedantic here, but I did say MOST, not all. Perhaps I should re-word that to say 'A GREAT DEAL OF buildings from that time'.

Some are gems. But a lot arent.

And I'm sure the Conran tower will be regarded as an architectural masterpiece in 50 years time.

I'd rather run the risk of Criterion looking dated in 50 years time, than build a bland box that will never be anything more than average.

I wont be budged on this,.

Erm, who gives a flying fuck what you think??

Erm, who gives a flying fuck what you think??

To continue, (sorry, the computater went a bit mad), CP's design is superb, it is a perfect example of modern, daring architecture - if it was in Sheffield you be loving it, i smell green cheese DINP..............

And I'm sure the Conran tower will be regarded as an architectural masterpiece in 50 years time.

I'd rather run the risk of Criterion looking dated in 50 years time, than build a bland box that will never be anything more than average.

The Conran Tower wont be regarded as a masterpiece at any stage of its life, but nor do I see it dating in the same vein as Criterion, which looks bad already, and will look worse in years to come.

To continue, (sorry, the computater went a bit mad), CP's design is superb, it is a perfect example of modern, daring architecture - if it was in Sheffield you be loving it, i smell green cheese DINP..............

You aint read all of my posts have you. I've already said I wouldnt like it if it was in another city, and am not into all this City v City shit, its nothing to do with Leeds. Although i'm in Sheffield, i'm not FROM Sheffield so I have no burning allegiance to the place either.

Criterion is a perfect example of over-hyped, monolithic, angular shite.

And you cared enough to respond.

but nor do I see it dating in the same vein as Criterion,

Tell us more Oh Soothsayer. I'd love to have your insight, when did you discover your "gift"?

But it still looks like it took no more than a minute to design.


Perhaps, but in that scale of things, the Conran tower must have taken all of 10 to 15 seconds to design.

You can't argue that the impact of a simple rectangular block symptomatic of 60s design will have anywhere near the impact on the skyline as taller twin mirror imaged multifaceted but different scaled glass clad structures.

I still cannot believe they approved the Conran Tower, I'm amazed ! One could suspect foul play behind closed doors perhaps ? The Spital Tower proposed in Sheffield is a different matter, much more adventurous and forward looking, and a less controversial location.

Perhaps, but in that scale of things, the Conran tower must have taken all of 10 to 15 seconds to design.

You can't argue that the impact of a simple rectangular block symptomatic of 60s design will have anywhere near the impact on the skyline as taller twin mirror imaged multifaceted but different scaled glass clad structures.

I still cannot believe they approved the Conran Tower, I'm amazed ! One could suspect foul play behind closed doors perhaps ?


Foul Play? No chance.

You could have the tallest building in the world, but if it is shrouded in the midst of other talls, then its impact is lessened. As i've already said, I dont know the topography of Leeds but the Conran tower is perched on top of a hill - and it isnt surrounded by tall buildings, so it will certainly stand outon the skyline. And although its a more conventional design, it is by no means dull in colour, design or quality, quite the opposite in fact.

It will compliment its surroundings at ground level and its conventional design will not detract from views of the town hall - an ambitious design would be wrong for the site.

Should probably stop talking about the Conran Tower now anyway, there is a separate thread for discussion on it in the Sheffield section.

Aesthetics are of course purely subjective, however I've have to question whether someone who thinks Criterion is ugly yet consders the bloated ill proportioned Bugatti Veyron to be the zenith of car design and has an avator of Clarkson, the man frequently voted the worst dressed man in Britain can be regarded as being a good judge of design! ;)

Jeremy Clarkson is a fucking tit, who usually appeals to young-minded males with his OTT bravado and crap jokes. So the avatar does Dinp few favours on the taste scales.

I would also question the judegment of somebody who says Criterion looks as though it took 1 minute to design- and then proceeds to sing the praises of Conran tower which is a mere rectangle shape... :bash:

Also, to say that Conran fits its surrounding just because it is more dull and boring hardly works in its favour. If man had always had this attitude towards architecture, there would be no inspiring buildings. In fact, the town hall would never have been something worth protecting becuase it would itself have been designed to fit in with some mud-hut that existed near by.

Your view is the kind of aesthetic, value-judement nonsense that the gob shites at English Heritgae come out with.

In my opinion, having lots of inspiring and interesting archittecture is better than having a bland 'in-keeping' landscape that sends people to sleep as soon as they arrive off the train- and will not be remotely memorbale for visitors.

As you are on the subject.
I think that thing proposed for Sheffield is a complete bag of wank. It's a big, ugly, crappy, piss poor, 60's looking turd IMO.


WTF? :dunno: :?
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/1884ArundelGateBlock1_pic5.jpg
Hands up, who wants a retro 60's block for Leeds?

i guess you dont like stone and bronze cladding.

Jeremy Clarkson is a fucking tit, who usually appeals to young-minded males with his OTT bravado and crap jokes. So the avatar does Dinp few favours on the taste scales.

I would also question the judegment of somebody who says Criterion looks as though it took 1 minute to design- and then proceeds to sing the praises of Conran tower which is a mere rectangle shape... :bash:

Also, to say that Conran fits its surrounding just because it is more dull and boring hardly works in its favour. If man had always had this attitude towards architecture, there would be no inspiring buildings. In fact, the town hall would never have been something worth protecting becuase it would itself have been designed to fit in with some mud-hut that existed near by.

Your view is the kind of aesthetic, value-judement nonsense that the gob shites at English Heritgae come out with.

In my opinion, having lots of inspiring and interesting archittecture is better than having a bland 'in-keeping' landscape that sends people to sleep as soon as they arrive off the train- and will not be remotely memorbale for visitors.

So we've descended to personal insults now because I don't like Criterion.

Boo Hoo.

Most of you must have no clue at all about planning - if you did you'd realise that blending buildings into their surroundings can be very important, particularly if there are iconic and/or listed buildings in the vicinity. That's not an EH line (infact I deplore many of their whingeings), its just common sense. Sometimes you don't need to blend buildings, but its important to recognise that sometimes you have to be sensitive.

That's why i've praised the Conran Tower. Not because it will be the oracle of Sheffield for years to come - it wont. Not because its design makes me moist - it doesnt. Its because of how well the building will compliment and enhance its surroundings and provide an attractive, yet inoffensive gateway landmark to the city centre from the train station.

If you want to sing the praises of varied design everywhere, then I have two words for you:

Will Alsop

Research his crackpot schemes, come back and tell me you like what you see, and i'll arrange for the white coats to come collect you, or anyone else who finds themselves vertical down below at the thought of his work.

Jeremy Clarkson is a twat, but he is one of the few non-PC people left in the televised world and love or hate him, he is funny and a great writer - if like me you like satire.

The Bugatti Veyron is an astonishing accomplishment that wont be scaring the skies, or the streets for the next forty years. It'll most likely be garaged, out of view and out of the way of envious chavs.

I cant deny Criterion is a unique, flagship project for Leeds. But I just dont like it. Accept it and move on people!

:)

There are no architecturally signiffigant buildings facing the Criterion site though.

There are no architecturally signiffigant buildings facing the Criterion site though.

If that's the case, then it probably is an ideal site for less conventional architecture.

I really like Criterion it has to be my favourite Ian Simpson design, I just hope they don't alter or tweak the design to calm prospective tenants fears that it might easily topple over, would be a shame if this happens, unless they improve the design and it looks even better.

Much prefer Criterion to BWP which looks too clinical.

So we've descended to personal insults now because I don't like Criterion.

Boo Hoo.

Most of you must have no clue at all about planning - if you did you'd realise that blending buildings into their surroundings can be very important, particularly if there are iconic and/or listed buildings in the vicinity. That's not an EH line (infact I deplore many of their whingeings), its just common sense. Sometimes you don't need to blend buildings, but its important to recognise that sometimes you have to be sensitive.

That's why i've praised the Conran Tower. Not because it will be the oracle of Sheffield for years to come - it wont. Not because its design makes me moist - it doesnt. Its because of how well the building will compliment and enhance its surroundings and provide an attractive, yet inoffensive gateway landmark to the city centre from the train station.

If you want to sing the praises of varied design everywhere, then I have two words for you:

Will Alsop

Research his crackpot schemes, come back and tell me you like what you see, and i'll arrange for the white coats to come collect you, or anyone else who finds themselves vertical down below at the thought of his work.

Jeremy Clarkson is a twat, but he is one of the few non-PC people left in the televised world and love or hate him, he is funny and a great writer - if like me you like satire.

:)

Ha ha,
I was just kidding Dimp :)

But seriously, you're very mis-guided and making some of the mistakes that your course should have educated you to avoid.

Everything you have said represents a subjective value judgement. Yet you fall into the age-old trap of a planner haveing an aesthetic judgement, believing it to be objective fact, and then imposing those tastes on other people as though they represent some science. Do they not teach you about modernism and post-modertnism on the under graduate courses at SHU?

So when you talk about people having no clue about planning- you should stop making the mistake of thinking planning is a science. When you talk about it being important for a building to "blend" into its surroundings, you are expressing an aesthetic taste judgement- no more, no less. You don't even explain what "blend" means- and how much blending should there be.

Your use of terms like 'inoffensive' and 'enhancing' - surely you understand that this is like saying the colour red is better than the colour green- and acting like this is an absolute truth. Surely somebody with a university education understands this?

Personally, I actually like there to be a big mix of styles. Whether you can believe this or not is immaterial. It is my opinion, and others will no doubt share it. Also, I do like some of Alsop's schemes.- though not all of them. Do you think the Empire State Building "blended" with its surroundings when it was built? Do you think the town hall in Sheffield "blended" when it was built?

Oh, and yes I do like satire. Aesop, Orwell and Zappa spring to mind. I'll have to check out some of Jeremy Clarkson's errmm.... works....... :crazy:

If that's the case, then it probably is an ideal site for less conventional architecture.

And that's exactly why you've just made a tit of yourself Dinp, you've just spouted on about the importance of blending buildings into their surroundings whilst not knowing the site for which Criterion is proposed! Your dislike of Criterion seems to be based on the fact that it wouldn't be appropriate for the Conran Tower site, possibly it wouldn't but that's not where it's going to be built!

You want a building that is truely out of keeping with it's surroundings, look at the proposals for Beetham London and the thankfully now canned Potters Field.

Of course you're entitled to your view on the appearance of Criterion but if you look at the rate a scraper poll, you'll realise that you're massively in the minority, and it's polled high scores from forumers from many cities not just Leeds. I work overlooking some of Europes best architecture, Lloyds of London and the Gherkin, and still think Criterion is a stunner and that's what's so exciting, Leeds could be set to get a piece of modern architecture to rival the best.

I also find your presumption that you have to be planning student to understand blending buildings into the surroundings more than a little patronising. Indeed I would venture to suggest that if a few more qualified planners understood this then our towns and cities would be better places.

yeah, so take that dinp

Ha ha,
I was just kidding Dimp :)

But seriously, you're very mis-guided and making some of the mistakes that your course should have educated you to avoid.

Everything you have said represents a subjective value judgement. Yet you fall into the age-old trap of a planner haveing an aesthetic judgement, believing it to be objective fact, and then imposing those tastes on other people as though they represent some science. Do they not teach you about modernism and post-modertnism on the under graduate courses at SHU?

So when you talk about people having no clue about planning- you should stop making the mistake of thinking planning is a science. When you talk about it being important for a building to "blend" into its surroundings, you are expressing an aesthetic taste judgement- no more, no less. You don't even explain what "blend" means- and how much blending should there be.

Your use of terms like 'inoffensive' and 'enhancing' - surely you understand that this is like saying the colour red is better than the colour green- and acting like this is an absolute truth. Surely somebody with a university education understands this?

Personally, I actually like there to be a big mix of styles. Whether you can believe this or not is immaterial. It is my opinion, and others will no doubt share it. Also, I do like some of Alsop's schemes.- though not all of them. Do you think the Empire State Building "blended" with its surroundings when it was built? Do you think the town hall in Sheffield "blended" when it was built?

Oh, and yes I do like satire. Aesop, Orwell and Zappa spring to mind. I'll have to check out some of Jeremy Clarkson's errmm.... works....... :crazy:

I quoted your post but wasn't directing everything there at you, it was more the antidinp trail around it - sorry if it seemed like that.

You're right, what i've been saying is a judgement, but I dont see a problem with it. Everyone has their own judgement and believes it to be right/good etc, be it related to aesthetics or otherwise. I'm not going to state my opinion and then say in the same sentence - "actually, this isn't gospel you know".

There's nothing wrong with saying "I dont like this because it doesn't look attractive" - its an opinion and anyone with half a brain cell can assertain that despite the quote being dressed up as a fact, clearly it is not one.

And of course there are mixes of building styles anywhere and everywhere all over the country and the world. Some gel together fantastically, some do not. I've not said that pioneering designs are all bad or they should never be placed next to this, that or the other. I just dont like this particular one. Planning depends on local context and politics to an extent, but on occasions, bodies such as EH, CABE do intervene - sometimes with good reason, sometimes to nitpick.

I'm not even doubting the quality of materials, the durability against weathering or anything like that, I just do not like the design and no amount of badgering or bullying will change that view. I hope Criterion looks better in the flesh than it does on the renders.

Your dislike of Criterion seems to be based on the fact that it wouldn't be appropriate for the Conran Tower site, possibly it wouldn't but that's not where it's going to be built!

No, its based on the fact that I dont like its design. Someone else drew a comparison with the Conran Tower which is why I explained my reasons for liking it.

I also find your presumption that you have to be planning student to understand blending buildings into the surroundings more than a little patronising. Indeed I would venture to suggest that if a few more qualified planners understood this then our towns and cities would be better places.

Again, No. A lot of people on these forums are just kids who cream at the sight of a tall building with little or no regard to how it sits within its surroundings - all they are interested in is a skyline rendering or a project rendering, which I think is shallow. People with any common sense (and planners, planning students) should know that piecemeal planning of this nature is not desirable.

And before you go all dense on me again, I am talking in general terms. Please read things properly before taking a dig next time.

Again, No. A lot of people on these forums are just kids who cream at the sight of a tall building with little or no regard to how it sits within its surroundings - all they are interested in is a skyline rendering or a project rendering, which I think is shallow. People with any common sense (and planners, planning students) should know that piecemeal planning of this nature is not desirable.

And before you go all dense on me again, I am talking in general terms. Please read things properly before taking a dig next time.

Yes and some of us aren't. Plenty of us have grown up with an enthusiasm for architecture and urban development. Could you please explain how CP is piecemeal planning?

OK forget the views on the aesthetics, that's subjective and your view is just as valid as anyone elses. It's the comments about not relating to it's surroundings that I'm talking about. Read the PDFs that LN1 posted about how the towers are fitting into the fabric around Criterion by opening up existing railway arches to provide through access to the city centre. The juxtaposition of the old railway arches, some old warehouse conversions nearby and the cutting edge clean lines mean that it's a perfect location IMO. But hey what do I know, I've only lived in the Leeds area for 30 years, and know the centre like the back of my hand. You don't know where the location is and yet you're harping on about piecemeal planning and the lack of interaction with the surroundings. How presumptous is that?

Dense am I? OK, I'll bear that in mind! :D

Yes and some of us aren't. Plenty of us have grown up with an enthusiasm for architecture and urban development. Could you please explain how CP is piecemeal planning? Read the PDFs that LN1 posted about how the towers are fitting into the fabric around Criterion by opening up existing railway arches to provide through access to the city centre. The juxtaposition of the old railway arches, some old warehouse conversions nearby and the cutting edge clean lines mean that it's a perfect location IMO. But hey what do I know, I've only lived in the Leeds area for 30 years, and know the centre like the back of my hand. You don't know where the location is and yet you're harping on about piecemeal planning and the lack of interaction with the surroundings. How presumptous is that?

Dense am I? OK, I'll bear that in mind! :D

Yet again you haven't read what I put. I'll even quote myself:

Again, No. A lot of people on these forums are just kids who cream at the sight of a tall building with little or no regard to how it sits within its surroundings - all they are interested in is a skyline rendering or a project rendering, which I think is shallow. People with any common sense (and planners, planning students) should know that piecemeal planning of this nature is not desirable.

And before you go all dense on me again, I am talking in general terms. Please read things properly before taking a dig next time.

Now where did I say Criterion was a bad piece of piecemeal planning and that it doesn't suit its surroundings?

Nowhere. Not in the last post, or in any of the others.

Most of you must have no clue at all about planning - if you did you'd realise that blending buildings into their surroundings can be very important, particularly if there are iconic and/or listed buildings in the vicinity. That's not an EH line (infact I deplore many of their whingeings), its just common sense. Sometimes you don't need to blend buildings, but its important to recognise that sometimes you have to be sensitive.

That's why i've praised the Conran Tower. Not because it will be the oracle of Sheffield for years to come - it wont. Not because its design makes me moist - it doesnt. Its because of how well the building will compliment and enhance its surroundings and provide an attractive, yet inoffensive gateway landmark to the city centre from the train station.


What's this about then? Seems to me to be in relation to why you like the Conran and don't like Criterion? If not why is it in the Criterion thread?

If your dislike of Criterion is just on aesthetics then fair enough.

Anyways, I'm off for food and drink, I bid you farewell! :cheers:

Farewell, may you return with some sense.

Theres nothing worse than a planner who thinks its in their remit to comment on design. Sadly it happens all too often when planners think they know how to design buildings better than architects who train for 7 years and thats when you end up with complete utter shite. Unfortunately it's in the hands of the planners when it comes to approving schemes and can rest on whether they personally like the design...no matter what its merits or whether it is a fantastic design or not.

Nothing worse than a planner than thinks its in their remit to comment on design. Sadly it happens all too often when planners think they know how to design buildings better than architects who train for 7 years and thats when you end up with complete utter shite. Unfortunately it's in the hands of the planners when it comes to approving schemes and unfortunately a lot of it rests on whether they personally like the scheme...no matter what its design merits and whether it is a fantasic design or not.
Larven I've often sported a rather puzzled look at the idea that the professional people that work hard to put building schemes together are then thwarted by some local councillor on the "planning committee" who throw it out because it looks a bit boxy or they don't much like the look of it or some other arbitrary reason.

How is this allowed to happen? Who are these councillors on the "planning committee"? Who are they and where did they come from?

I know developers can appeal - and often do have the decision overturned by ODPM(?) - but the expense and hassle must make some people in the industry wonder if it's worth coming up with anything a bit different.

You've hit the nail on the head magicrealist.

Quite often planners stick their noses in because they can, because they have their own agenda or because of political reasons. Sometimes its the case that something wonderful is proposed only for it to be whittled down to mediocrity by the planners for their own reasons. You can have something daring and striking like Criterion Place but because the chief planner may not like the design or think its too tall in their "personal opinion" then you might end up with 2 20 storey brick boxes. Its the architects who end up with egg on their faces revealing images of what the building will probably look like after the planners have had their way with the design, I've seen it so many times and it is one of the most frustrating parts of my job.

Developers can appeal quite right but sometimes its not worth the hassle and expense of trying to propose something nice when you know the planners will moan about the materials, height and god knows what else. If you want to get your scheme passed well...you have to compromise with them. On a positive note some planning departments are far worse than others and its refreshing to see cities such as Leeds and Manchester taking an enlightened view to some of the more striking and daring proposals and whats more...getting them built.

If you want to get your scheme passed well...you have to compromise with them.
Hah hah - like the euphemism there Larven...are we talking brown paper bags, or merely "free" tickets to England vs Wales? Or most probably everything in between.

Here's another euphemism for you: it's the "healthy" relationship between developers and planners. I guess when this relationship goes a bit Pete Tong is when you get interminable delay, obfuscation and interference. Perhaps Sheffield has had this problem? Even Liverpool and Glasgow seem to have their ample share of the "old school". Or maybe it simply comes down to one person within city hall just being a bit of a twat.

Yes Sheffield has had this problem for sometime, mainly for political reasons. Who is it once said that the businessman live in Leeds whilst the workers live in Sheffield? There seems to be a culture of mediocrity in Sheffield that means some people don't think we need flash buildings, stores like Harvey Nichols or anything that would put the city above and beyond what many people feel "confortable" with. Thankfully things seem to be changing slowly but the city is always playing catch up with its northern cousin and probably always will.

In answer to you question Sheffield has its fair share of old school minds and more than its fair share of twats in the town hall.

Theres nothing worse than a planner who thinks its in their remit to comment on design. Sadly it happens all too often when planners think they know how to design buildings better than architects who train for 7 years and thats when you end up with complete utter shite. Unfortunately it's in the hands of the planners when it comes to approving schemes and can rest on whether they personally like the design...no matter what its merits or whether it is a fantastic design or not.

Its no wonder planners get involved in design though - i'm not sure if this is a particular problem with smaller projects, small architecture firms or what, but architects:

1) Can submit the same design that's been used in 1001 other places
2) Can submit designs with blank facades, (e.g. in the case of small blocks of flats - 4 rows of a slightly different coloured brick does not constitute a good design IMO) and then go spare at the planning committee when their barely legal project gets rejected.

I've been quite disillusioned with what architects try and 'get away' with in a variety of projects, which is where the negotiation comes in. I think developers expect to have to negotiate now and so do the planners.

The Architects are serving the interest of the developer, the planning committee are serving the interests of the community and the planner becomes the middle man - trying to squeeze what they can from developers/architects and then making recommendations to the committee.

To balance it out though, i've seen some great plans submitted and the architects have done more than enough good work. I hope to see more of this.

..

Its no wonder planners get involved in design though - i'm not sure if this is a particular problem with smaller projects, small architecture firms or what, but architects:

1) Can submit the same design that's been used in 1001 other places
2) Can submit designs with blank facades, (e.g. in the case of small blocks of flats - 4 rows of a slightly different coloured brick does not constitute a good design IMO) and then go spare at the planning committee when their barely legal project gets rejected.

I've been quite disillusioned with what architects try and 'get away' with in a variety of projects, which is where the negotiation comes in. I think developers expect to have to negotiate now and so do the planners.


Agree with you 100% on this Dinp, looks like we have some common ground after all ;)

Agree with you 100% on this Dinp, looks like we have some common ground after all ;)

:D See, i'm not a complete fucktard!

Today i accepted a full-time job in a local authority planning department as well. Well south of Sheffield though, so don't worry ;)

I vil be ze Nazi planneur! :hahano:

As you are on the subject.
I think that thing proposed for Sheffield is a complete bag of wank. It's a big, ugly, crappy, piss poor, 60's looking turd IMO.


Now look daveylad, don't beat around the bush here, you don't have to tread carefully, just say what you really think ! Just be honest and come straight out with how you feel, no-one will mind.

As you are on the subject.
I think that thing proposed for Sheffield is a complete bag of wank. It's a big, ugly, crappy, piss poor, 60's looking turd IMO.


:rant: :blahblah: Yawwnnn...

Now look daveylad, don't beat around the bush here, you don't have to tread carefully, just say what you really think ! Just be honest and come straight out with how you feel, no-one will mind.

I should learn not to post after I've been out and had a few too many.

:D See, i'm not a complete fucktard!

Today i accepted a full-time job in a local authority planning department as well. Well south of Sheffield though, so don't worry ;)

I vil be ze Nazi planneur! :hahano:


Haha...thank fuck for that, if something like Criterion Place lands on your desk you'll probably reject it out of hand.....only joking lol!

In all seriousness I believe planners should get involved in design and express they're opinions. We all know a shit building when we see it or catch on quick if the same garbage is rolled out by a developer over and over again. What annoys me is when planners criticize exciting and daring designs and, over a lengthy process end up destroying the original integrity of the design. There's a few jobs in Sheffield that started out great, one was even won in an architectural competion yet it turned out to be complete garbage. This was no fault of the developer or architect who fully intended to build the original, competion winning design but due to the meddling amnd demands of the planners.

:D
Today i accepted a full-time job in a local authority planning department as well. Well south of Sheffield though, so don't worry ;)


Congratulations Dinp! Hope that the job goes well. :cheers:

has this been accepted

No. Weve not heard anything about it for ages.

Coming up to two years since it was announced, in March.

.........How long was it before BWP started construction? I recken 3 or 4 years............so there's hope for Criterion.

If Prezza has his way, planning consent will only be valid for three years instead of the current five.

Coming up to two years since it was announced, in March.

There's been no formal planning application. However i don't think it's dead in the water, only playing dead in the water!

I think this is now 61 storeys. I think this must be an increase in height- an extra 14 storeys must make it higher, rather than just cramming in more floors. I say that, because it lists 'Criterion Place/Kissing Towers, Leeds (WSP), 61 storeys, In planning' in the New Civil Engineer Magazine that came out on the 26th January 2006. The website is www.nceplus.co.uk but you need to register. It has no article on it, it is just a caption for the first picture we saw of it, alongside other skyscrapers (All London, Gallowgate, Manchester Beetham, West Tower, Arena Central with similar captions). The fact that this magazine is so recent and that it is a specialist magazine suggests to me that this is true information. Does anybody know what WSP means? Whatever it is, it is also listen next to Blackfriars Road, Columbus Tower, Multiplex Living Tower, 1 Millharbour, LBT and Beetham Tower.

Does it say anything interesting about Arena Central lol ;)

'Arena Central, Birmingham, 50 storeys, In planning' Thats it.

I think this is now 61 storeys. I think this must be an increase in height- an extra 14 storeys must make it higher, rather than just cramming in more floors. I say that, because it lists 'Criterion Place/Kissing Towers, Leeds (WSP), 61 storeys, In planning' in the New Civil Engineer Magazine that came out on the 26th January 2006. The website is www.nceplus.co.uk but you need to register. It has no article on it, it is just a caption for the first picture we saw of it, alongside other skyscrapers (All London, Gallowgate, Manchester Beetham, West Tower, Arena Central with similar captions). The fact that this magazine is so recent and that it is a specialist magazine suggests to me that this is true information. Does anybody know what WSP means? Whatever it is, it is also listen next to Blackfriars Road, Columbus Tower, Multiplex Living Tower, 1 Millharbour, LBT and Beetham Tower.

No.1, you've turned up some cracking finds recently, if this one is true, I'll be doffing my cap to you. Lets hope so, 61 storeys is really starting to verge on spectacular. Must also be a height increase if true. Oh, knees trembling. Bring it!

Fingers crossed methinks!!!

I'll scan in the page it was on if you want proof, but there really isn't any extra information except that. I was really very suprised to see it, and it was so random- the article below concerned London skyscrapers. I got it from the same guy I got the other Criterion PDF from which I still haven't been able to upload.

I think whatever the height thoguh, it still confirms this is very much alive, and a change in height would explain why it has been so quiet. I suppose it was designed to be a real landmark building, and with the proposals so rapidly changing, a radical height would be the only way to ensure it really would be the building that makes Leeds.

We'll have to wait and see, but I do think this is a reliable source due to the reasons I listed earlier. I've never even heard of this mag until now.

No.1, you've turned up some cracking finds recently, if this one is true, I'll be doffing my cap to you. Lets hope so, 61 storeys is really starting to verge on spectacular. Must also be a height increase if true. Oh, knees trembling. Bring it!

G-WIZ That is huge!! That will be twice the size as BWP then? If this is correct I just hope the council don't go cold on the idea.

Thats fantastic news hope its true :cheers:

My favourite scheme just got even better! Please, please let them build this soon!

At 61 storeys won't this be the tallest scraper outside London?

I believe so.

Don't want to appear a wet blanket, but in view of previous similar damp squib intrelligence which fizzled out on the rock of reality, we shall have to wait and see whether this is just a "(61 storey) pie in the sky" before getting out the champagne ! :)

About 190m if its true

About 190m if its true

Also, unlike Birmingham, it shouldn't pose a problem with the airport as the airport is over 200m above sea level.

Sounds a bit optimistic to me, I think the current proposals are tall enough for the site and the city in general but I am however willing to be pleasantly surprised. :)

And to think I was looking forward to a well-proportioned skyline.

Such changes would obviously explain the long delay.

Oh well, guess we'll have to have some other 50+ storey proposals to balance it out then!

Well the 52 storey Venture won't be too far- I don't know if the smaller tower has increased in height (I suspect it will have)

Does anybody know what WSP means?

WSP are the structural Engineers for those projects
http://www.wspgroup.com/uk/

Also, good find, but I wouldn't take it as gospel. I'd give the NCE a 50% chance of being correct on that going on some of their previous journalistic misnomers.

61 storeys :O Amazing news if this is true, it could even stretch to 200m with the pointy tops.

hope this is true. If the big tower is 61 floors then the small one would have to be taller too otherwise it would look too small.

I wouldn't get excited yet, we need to see this anounced somewhere first.

Any sign of Criterion Place having a planning application in any shape or form at all would be good news.

Just need some news on this now and I'll be happy as Larry

Not sure if this is 'news' (but I CBA to look through the 11 pages of this thread to find out...):
Simons Estates are the contractors for this. Go to their website www.simonsgroup.com then click 'Developments'. Now click 'Project List'. Criterion is the 5th project on the list. Not much details:
Criterion Place, Leeds

800,000 sq ft Mixed Use City Centre Development
Includes Offices, Leisure, Retail & Residential
380 Basement Car Parking Spaces
Glass Clad Twin Towers of 29 and 47 Storeys
Commencement - Autumn 2007
Completion - Summer 2010
Total Investment Value £200m

Sad to see it says 47 storeys not 61, good to see a start date though. However both the number of storeys and the start date could be old and the website simply not updated?

61 was just a quoted figure from New Civil Engineer Magazine; from a caption under an image. Apparently if I really want to know that badly, just ring up.

..

is lumiere part of the criterion project.

do you mean the lumiere may now be 61 florrs instead of 52 ?

sorry i finde it confussing with all the names

can someone explain to me lol

Criterion Place is a different project to La Lumiere.

cant ait to see it :)

where did it say that it may be 61 floors high ?

61 was just a quoted figure from New Civil Engineer Magazine; from a caption under an image. Apparently if I really want to know that badly, just ring up.

..

..

61 was just a mistake in the magazine as far as I know. There were other things that wern't that accurate the section.

Sad to see it says 47 storeys not 61

I'm not.

I'd rather see some nice clusters than one giant phallus dominating the skyline. I hope the announcement of Lumiere will kick start this project bak into life.

As I said in the 'what is too tall' thread - other towers will spring up over time some shorter some taller, making it look less dominating. Tall towers make a real statement and get attention - just look at the topping out of the Manc tower...

I have to say I'm losing my patience with this project. When will we find out whether this gets the go ahead?

Maybe Criterion will be to Leeds what Eclipse and Chesham House were to Sheffield (non-starters). I'm not a fan of CP, but I hope this proposal doesn't go the same way.

:)

..

All hope is not lost.
RWDI Anemos have been appointed by Dandara to provide wind engineering design advice on an exciting twin-tower project planned for Leeds. Having won the right to develop the site through a competition the design team, which includes Ian Simpson Architects and WSP consulting engineers, are working to a tight schedule to complete design works. Desk studies of the key wind-related issues will be prepared to speed this process - including calculations of the dynamic response and likely peak cladding pressures. Then, as the design is refined, the proposed buildings will be wind tunnel tested to confirm the wind loading and local wind environment at street level.
Dated 12th Feb 2006
http://www.rwdi-anemos.com/news/

Onix, I think thats the Lumiere scheme rather than Criterion Place.

..

i read the the yorkshire news on bbc interactive this morning and it said that it will be 52 storys high and 2 meters higher than the one in manchester :)

dont know when it changed from 47 to 52. does anyone know ?

same :)

..

Well at first it seemed to be CP but now it looks more likely to be La Lumiere.

All hope is not lost.
RWDI Anemos have been appointed by Dandara to provide wind engineering design advice on an exciting twin-tower project planned for Leeds. Having won the right to develop the site through a competition the design team, which includes Ian Simpson Architects and WSP consulting engineers, are working to a tight schedule to complete design works. Desk studies of the key wind-related issues will be prepared to speed this process - including calculations of the dynamic response and likely peak cladding pressures. Then, as the design is refined, the proposed buildings will be wind tunnel tested to confirm the wind loading and local wind environment at street level.
Dated 12th Feb 2006
http://www.rwdi-anemos.com/news/

Well found.
By the way, the article is entitled 'Criterion Place, Leeds' (as Ian Simpson and WSP are also working on La Lumiere) and dated 12 February 2006.

That seems to confirm the project is still moving forward, added to Larvens post in December, below -

I went to a lecture last night with Ian Simpson as one of the guest speakers. He mentioned this development and said that they were preparing detailed planning drawings for the scheme. He also said the visuals did not show the scheme as high as it should be so whether that means an increase in height and they are ammending the drawings for this I do not know. However he did say Leeds City Council were 100% behind the scheme and eager for it to go ahead. Ian Simpson himself came across as very much a champion of tall buildings and I'm sure he has been pushing the council all the way with this, particularly citing his other creation that looms over Manchester and the impact that has had for the city.

..

Yes, thats the intention.

is it true that clearing the site for lumiere is supossed to start later this year and constuction begin early 2007 ?

If all goes to plan, the main contractor should be appointed in May, planning permission should be granted in July, ground works should start in October, and actual construction should start in January 07.

So Criterion Place will start in Summer 2007 and La Lumiere will start in January 2007?

If that is the case then by 2010 Leeds will have quite a skyline.

All hope is not lost.
RWDI Anemos have been appointed by Dandara to provide wind engineering design advice on an exciting twin-tower project planned for Leeds. Having won the right to develop the site through a competition the design team, which includes Ian Simpson Architects and WSP consulting engineers, are working to a tight schedule to complete design works. Desk studies of the key wind-related issues will be prepared to speed this process - including calculations of the dynamic response and likely peak cladding pressures. Then, as the design is refined, the proposed buildings will be wind tunnel tested to confirm the wind loading and local wind environment at street level.
Dated 12th Feb 2006
http://www.rwdi-anemos.com/news/


HEY, we've all missed the obvious here ...

How long have Dandara been involved in Criterion Place ?

They are a massive development company who specialise in big city centre schemes, including the huge Glasgow Harbour Development with three up to 50 storey towers. have they taken over from Simons Estates ? (who haven't been mentioned in years), or have they gone into a joint partnership ? They never announce these things do they, just let us find out through being detectives looking for small clues (still, that all adds to the interest).

Yes, it is interesting. Yet another twist in the long-running saga. The article also says the design team are working to a tight schedule, so hopefully we'll see more about it in the near future.

So Criterion Place will start in Summer 2007 and La Lumiere will start in January 2007?

If that is the case then by 2010 Leeds will have quite a skyline.

Thanks Dom - good to see someone outside Leeds taking an interest - you got any Leeds links or just like our proposed scrapers?

Great find about the wind research... Another glimmer of hope...

Had a chat with an Ian Simpson representative today about Criterion Place at the Lumiere exhibition, and they confirmed that after a long lull, work on Criterion Place has re-started at Ian Simpsons Architects. It looks like there is a good chance of seeing both pairs of Simpson's towers under construction at the same time some time in the near future. I think that will provide the iconic feature Leeds has been looking for.

Had a chat with an Ian Simpson representative today about Criterion Place at the Lumiere exhibition, and they confirmed that after a long lull, work on Criterion Place has re-started at Ian Simpsons Architects. It looks like there is a good chance of seeing both pairs of Simpson's towers under construction at the same time some time in the near future. I think that will provide the iconic feature Leeds has been looking for.
Good work Rob - wouldn't have occured to me to do that. Great news!

Had a chat with an Ian Simpson representative today about Criterion Place at the Lumiere exhibition, and they confirmed that after a long lull, work on Criterion Place has re-started at Ian Simpsons Architects. It looks like there is a good chance of seeing both pairs of Simpson's towers under construction at the same time some time in the near future. I think that will provide the iconic feature Leeds has been looking for.


Looks like 2007 is going to be a very exciting time for us Leeds skychasers.
Can't wait to see 4 new massive cranes dominating our skyline.

Actually this is a great chance to quiz them about Criterion - anyone asking how many floors it is?....

Wow, thats good news. Next year could be fantastic with the 4 towers rising, added to other major projects like Harewood/Eastgate getting started.

I asked one of the guys at the Lumiere exhibition, he said it was about 60.

Could break the 200m mark?
Rob, did the architect mention why there had been this "lull"?