Riverside South
Canary Wharf, London

Height: 214m and 189m
Floors: 44 and 38
Architect: Richard Rogers
Developer: Canary Wharf Group

Links:
Richard Rogers website (http://195.167.181.213/pdf/pdf/3410_web.pdf)
RS1 (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135460)
RS2 (http://www.emporis.com/en/wm/bu/?id=135459)
http://www.canarywharf.com/news/news%20stories/pr_11.htm


Notes:
These twin towers, joined at the base, would be situated on the south-western edge of the Canary Wharf estate.
Accountancy giants, PricewaterhouseCoopers, expressed an interest in taking these buildings for their new HQ.


Current Status:
Approved in summer 2004. Unlikely to start construction until a pre-let has been secured though.



http://www.richardrogers.co.uk/Asp/uploadedFiles/image/3410_Canary%20Riverside/design/3410_0140_1_w.jpg



http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/622/953riversidesouthtower1_pic5.jpg



http://skyscraperpage.com/gallery/data/622/953riversidesouthtower1_pic3.jpg

really like this, adds well to Canary Wharf :)

8/10

Fit in well to the estate, although lack originality, 8/10

I like its design very much. Not to mention its twin affect - a first in London at that height. I love its location. And its a really big project - 3 times the size of Menerva...and thats BIG!

So, im not just sayin this but. Ding! Ding!! Ding!!! 10 :colgate:

Oh, and it really fits in.

i like it - but i just hope the cladding doesnt end up looking like the infamous HQ5 (the ugliest building on the CW estate)

8/10

very nice, 8/10

Lord of the rings!

very nice towers, 8/10

Great design which will suit the Docklands very well.

8/10

8/10 fits in well CW and hopefully will block the crappy bank street twrs

I much prefer some of the older designs on the RRP site:

http://www.richardrogers.co.uk/render.aspx?siteID=1&navIDs=1,4,24,750&showImages=detail&showParent=true&imageID=1458

Some of the structural expressivism used is pretty cool and would have added a nice bit of variation to CW. I feel these two are rather bland in comparison.

8/10.i love all the approved, proposed, underconstruction skyscrapers in London.

8/10 the british version of the twin towers. alsoadds to the box style of cw

8/10...i like the effect of twin towers...but i thought the tallest tower was gonna be slightly TALLER then 1 Canada Square?!

6/10 - the original design was much better than the current one with the two centre blocks straddled by lower roofs at the same height - the eccentric step up shown in the render above was much nicer.

They look like from the picture. :lol:

Matter of the taste. The friend is probably right, that step up, would be even better.
I am greeting

8/10

8/10...i like the effect of twin towers...but i thought the tallest tower was gonna be slightly TALLER then 1 Canada Square?!


It will be higher on an AGL basis (above ground level) but 1 Canada Square is higher AOD (above ordnance datum - basically sea level) so it will appear slightly taller on the skyline. :)

7/10

That first picture just looks as if Canary Wharf is sticking the fingers up to the City of London :lol:

8/10 from me.

i struggle to think of a reason why i should vote for more than 1/10

should we really base our votes on height? and how well they fit into the skyline? :nuts:

what else is there to like about them?

^ Their elegant restrained design perhaps? Their successful breaking up of bulk? What looks from the renders to be excellent cladding? Their imposing presence on the skyline? The fact that they'll transform Canary Wharf into a proper diversified and interesting skyline?? There's a lot to like or even love about them....

They aren't elegant at all - from the south or north they're too wide and very bulky.

I guess that I'm annoyed at the boring design because the best site in London for a stunning waterfront skyscraper has been wasted on a couple of unmemorable glass boxes. Good quality cladding can't hide a dull skyscraper.

^ But from the east and west they're slender and articulated. Even when seen from three quarters angles you will be able to see that they are slim in one dimension (unlike, say, HSBC or Citigroup towers which have a square base) and that "lightens" them considerably. And I'd rather have conservative but elegant towers than trying-too-hard but ugly/flawed attention seekers.

I just don't like your use of the word elegant when referring to buildings that are, what, 50m plus wide from west to east? The fact that they look elegant from two angles doesn't really do the towers' aesthetics any favours! Elegant towers look slender, lightweight (almost as if they are floating/hovering on the ground they sit on); and are well proportioned... not a bulky mass of glass and steel. And I don't want a try-hard tower design for this site - just something that isn't a glass money-making box designed by the banks; badly proportioned and not elegant!

Canary Wharf already has too many towers like this, there has been no ambition with the design, nothing to move the area forward architecturally from the 1990s business park that the area still, for some reason, wants to cling on to.