Lower Parliament Street

Status: Pre-Planning
Regen Zone: Eastside
Developer: Chek Whyte Industries
Architects: Ian Simpson
Cost: £150m
Size 365,740 ft²
Height
Use: Office (123,000 ft²), Residential (258 rooms), Hotel (244 rooms), Car Parking (140 spaces), Retail.

Links:
Official Website (http://www.cityrev.co.uk/)
Visuals Hosted At New Nottingham
(http://www.newnottingham.com/downloads/lps.pdf)
Notes:
The wraps have finally come off new proposals by Chek Whyte Industries for Nottingham, the first true skyscraper for the city.

Designed by Ian Simpson Architects (who else?) the scheme features two towers, the tallest of which is 50 floors with a second adjacent building of 21 floors.

It is located in the heart of Nottingham on a site off Lower Parliament Street that is bounded by Lace Way, Poplar Street and Pennyfoot Street with the Eastside regeneration scheme literally over the road.

The two towers are joined by a shared podium that stands two floors tall over four basement levels of parking for 140 motorcars. The above the podium the shorter tower is almost exclusively 11,500 square metres of office space apart from the top level which is a roof garden.

The taller tower features 17 floors of hotel, 224 rooms in all, on its lowest levels and then with the separation of a plant floor continues with 27 regular floors of residential accommodation. The 45th floor is also a plant level and divides the five penthouse levels located in the crown from the rest of the building below them.

The design of the office building is blocky and conservative, perhaps as a direct counterpoint to its taller neighbour, with diagonal cross-bracing running above the podium to help support the bulk of the tower above it.

Towering over it is the taller of the two with a curving design and lip stick shaped top similar to the Beetham West Tower in Liverpool. The patterned cladding scheme on the design is also reminiscent of that, although Aedas were heavily influenced in turn by Simpson's earlier work.

Perhaps of most interest is the hollow crown of the building which the elevations indicate could contain a large private roof garden for the penthouse owner. It helps add a touch of transparency to the top and thanks to the modest façade overrun succeeds in being a gradual termination of the tip of the building.

It's still early days for the project with the scheme yet to be officially proposed, let alone go before the planning committee. Other tall buildings planned for Nottingham have struggled to get through the process and in the end been reduced in height - whether this happens again remains to be seen but if it gets through unmolested the design will be the tallest building in the East Midlands when completed at a little over 150 metres in height.

Current Status:
This has not yet been formally proposed.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2120/2146116777_f133e8b186_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2333/2146912988_0b3eb3ec0f_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2060/2146117795_ef61af797e_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2392/2146118083_fe52e182fb_o.jpg

Guys... go to the chek whyte site. This where I got this info from. It appears they are running some test on the new website because half of the pages are not working correctly. Some pages say things like "insert text here"... that sort of stuff.

I've copied all material over to new nottingham just incase it gets pulled down again soon.

And im not sure if you've noticed but it looks as if the smaller building has been pre-let out to the bio-city. If you look at the visuals i've posted in the links section there is a bridge taking you from the existing bio-city building to the smaller tower.

oh... and check the "latest highrise proposal thread" - http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=525420&page=20

Typical had to out do Leicester again! :D

That aside very nice. :)

:lol:

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2193/2147021700_47ec9e1eb8_o.jpg

That's a fantasticly scaled proposal! I do actually prefer (architecturally) the BioCity building (probably not pre-let but that's who they'll market it to) – but the taller tower does have a fantastic, very iconic feature in its 'planed' side.

Lets make lots of happy noise about this when it is applying for planning permission hey, — drown out those english heritage yobs.

Looks great, it's exciting to see a true high rise proposal for Nottingham. Even if it is cut in height to satisfy various bodies, it should still be very impressive. The centre desperately needs a high rise landmark, our skyline is a little generic at present.

Lets hope it materialises.

]...]cut in height to satisfy various bodies

English heritage yobs.

Wow. This is a suprise. 50 storeys :happy:
It looks a little like Beetham in Liverpool but that's not a bad thing. Lets just hope the nimby bastards don't complain about this one.
It'll be around the 150/160m mark about double the height of Viccy Flats.

gentlemen, i say we hold one minutes silence at 10pm tonight in honour of this proposal

awesome, simply, awesome

gentlemen, i say we hold one minutes silence at 10pm tonight in honour of this proposal

awesome, simply, awesome

Haaaaaaa!! :lol::lol::lol: I'm all for it lol. I'm just glad that this has been proposed.

I'm not a fan of Ian Simpson because his developments aren't as unique as they used to be but the sheer size of the proposal will make these very iconic.

Am I right that this is the tallest proposed building in the Midlands?

wow, I really like it. Hopefully it should build interest in the whole Eastside development.

Heres a video.. not sure what happened at the start but keeping watching it...

VAFw09Kqi6s

I must say I wasn't expecting this over the holidays. So there is a Santa Claus?! Happy Christmas everybody.

Jealous as hell

Should have no trouble seeing that from Beacon Hill


THIS IS NOTTINGHAM'S TRUMP CARD I DOUBT THAT LEICESTER CAN GET ANYWHERE NEAR THIS ?

Being a fan of tall buildings and coming from Leicester (a city associated with taller buildings) i begrudgingly wish you all the best and hope economic conditions and planning issues are favourable in making this skyscraper happen.

We should have an SSC Nottingham meet up when this is officially U/C.
We'll have another one when it tops out a few years later.

Very sleek! I hope Nottingham gets this. :yes:

Oh, and this should increase the number of forumers in your subforum. :okay:

^^ You just reminded me!

Looks great, it's exciting to see a true high rise proposal for Nottingham. Even if it is cut in height to satisfy various bodies, it should still be very impressive. The centre desperately needs a high rise landmark, our skyline is a little generic at present.

Lets hope it materialises.

Welcome to the forums DJ. I've never seen the EM threads so busy.

and Cob Rox. Thank you for you humble comments :lol:

This is amazing, far better than i had expected.

Wow, a 50 storey tower for Nottingham? I hope it gets built. :)

WOAH :eek: i have to say i am shocked!! but what a wicked proposal for Nottingham!! :happy:

Yeah beautiful design (especially the main tower). Great bit of news for the new year!

Really hope it gets built! Wonder if we will be able to see it from the Westbridge skybar :lol:

Wonder if Derby have secret plans for a 70 storey one???

Will this be the start of even more skyscrapers for the East Midlands?

wow, very nice building indeed.

lovely shape, and very slender - one the the best proposals i think i've seen for a city outside of the capital.

But WHY does every tall building outside London have to suffer the indignity of that horrid square/stripy/beetham'esque style cladding? :bash:

Luckily this is a decent example of how it can be used.

Awsome!!!

From the top you maybe able to see leicester or even possibly VTP in Brum??? (50 miles away but 200meters tall). Great news for the Midlands.

I think its amazing how much interest is being shown in the development already. Am I right in claiming that is third tallest proposed tower outside of London?

The site currently looks like this...

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1373/877705642_754cc25227.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1211/877704324_31c4091fe1.jpg?v=0

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1032/877699076_e7ffc1de24.jpg?v=0

I think there is a strong possibility that the 21 floor tower has been pre-let out to the bio-city (or at least partly). The designs include a bridge from the older bio-city building to the new one. There is also the bio-city logo on both the video and the images (they dont usually put on the real logos unless they are actually signed... they usually use fake ones).

Plus the Bio-City have stated quite a few times that they are planning another fourth expansion after the renovation they are doing now. If this is let out to Bio-City this will give the development the momentum it needs to push forward I would imagine. I'm sure they won't have any difficulty finding a 4/5 star hotel with the lack of them we currently have.

Finally.. i've just been thinking about what effect groups like civic society could have on this development? The only real case to reduce the heigh. of this development would be the effect it has on views.

In realliy...the only views this development would effect would be the ones from sneinton/colwick to lace market cliffs.... this view....

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1418/1240531559_aaaaf5a936_b.jpg

However... this would be blocked out by the already approved Eastside City (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=506419) development? This is the exact place the tall building on the Eastside plan will go.

When I went to that consultation, even the civic society agreed that Nottingham should have taller buildings but as long as they are iconic. How more iconic can we get than this? This isn't one of those controversial developments like the Pod or CCAN which when complete some will love and some will hate, this is one of those simple yet iconic developments that most will love.

This development would not create a wall, it would not cut of sneinton or st anns, it would not block sunlight to any precious gardens.... so what grounds would any heritage group have to object this development?
So... what grounds could any heri

Haaaaaaa!! :lol::lol::lol: I'm all for it lol. I'm just glad that this has been proposed.

I'm not a fan of Ian Simpson because his developments aren't as unique as they used to be but the sheer size of the proposal will make these very iconic.

Am I right that this is the tallest proposed building in the Midlands?

Great news for Nottingham, you need some tall buildings it will look really impressive if built!!!

I agree with you danz,i carnt see them being able to use the biocity logo without some kind of pre let arangement first.this would be great news for biocity as well,as their current buildings are nothing to write home about and as an expanding business they need something like this to make them stand out.

Maybe we could use a photo of Nottingham's skyline like the big pano that Dan took and insert this, Ozone and the old Brook Street proposal to see how it will compliment the rest of the skyline.

Infact... they may ask for it to be reduced because of the effect it has on the skyline but is the effect it will have on the skyline a bad one??

No it shouldn't look to bad. Victoria Flats although alot smaller than this are elevated by quite abit so it shouldn't stick out too much.

I've put this in the highrises section on the main page to see what people outside of the UK think of it.

Got a link?

That does look pretty cool, hope it gets built :D

So do I! :D

Those images make the rest of the city seem unbelievably low rise.

Were going to have a mini cluster with these two towers and the 19 storey Eastside Tower.
It'll be good when we find out the official height. It'll be pretty close to Lumiere in Leeds and that's 171m.

have known about this for a little while. now you know i can write about it. yay! *grumbles about commercial confidentiality* oh, and to all the people who have emailed me, thanks but this will NOT be the third tallest tower outside london. it might just scrape into the top 10. sorry guys.

Though i'd give this a go...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2149/2149890298_a29013310e_o.jpg

That looks good. Pity you have to scroll so far right to see it.

Just for you...

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2083/2149115047_189588b4f2_o.jpg

Thanks. :clown:

Woo, this looks brilliant!

Is there much else planned out in that direction? Seems from danz renders that its a bit of a long way from the other towers in Nottingham. And chequered cladding has been very hit and miss in past developments.

Otherwise though, the design looks fantastic.

This is planned (http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=506419) literally across the road from the site:

http://www.newnottingham.com/old/New%20Nottingham/Eastside%20City_files/546NottinghamEastsideProjectProgresses_pic1.jpg

^^ Thats nice...very dense. But not overbearing.

Some more info here:

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=1284

Crikey!! You dont go on the site for a couple of days and then this pops up. Would complement Eastside very well. If Biocity are already signed up would make this project even more viable. Lets hope we see a full application soon.

I see that on skyscrapernews they reacon its going to be just over 150 metres tall,i think its got to be quite a bit taller that that.if you look at the bit on top of the roof that must be the height of a further 5 storeys and the first two floors look like they are twice the height of a normal floor.im no expert but personally i recon 170m - 180m.

50 floor tall ian simpson designed residential building in manchester below. 150m exactly, double height top and bottom floors. furthermore, facade overruns are not counted in the roof height which is what this nottingham proposal has although this one has no facade overrun. i expect itll be about 155m in nottingham :)

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/1258HugeNewSimpsonProposalsForManchester_pic2.jpg

I love the bio city tower. Could that be made the 50 storey one? Sorry to put a damper on everyone's high spirits, but the chequered cladding will look dated in 20 years and risks being another mistake on the Nottingham skyline - just look at what was considered 'cool' once on Maid Marian way.

A tower so salient in a city like Nottingham should either used something tried and tested or be bold and daring.... may I'll change my mind when better renders are available.

[QUOTE=gothicform;17411151] facade overruns are not counted in the roof height which is what this nottingham proposal has.
Didn't know that,i stand corrected.

its ok scoobs :) we count the roof height, and then the pinnacle height separately, things like facade overruns, antenna and spires dont count unless they are structural - this one clearly isnt. the reason is that you could stick a big flag pole on your shed and have the worlds tallest building which is a cop out really... that reminds me, must add it and its neighbour to the database.

its an exciting proposal and i hope it goes ahead but i think we should all retain some realism here about the scale of it compared to what the local council usually let through. i'd love to be surprised but i reckon itll be given a height reduction.

its ok scoobs :) we count the roof height, and then the pinnacle height separately, things like facade overruns, antenna and spires dont count unless they are structural - this one clearly isnt. the reason is that you could stick a big flag pole on your shed and have the worlds tallest building which is a cop out really... that reminds me, must add it and its neighbour to the database.

its an exciting proposal and i hope it goes ahead but i think we should all retain some realism here about the scale of it compared to what the local council usually let through. i'd love to be surprised but i reckon itll be given a height reduction.

I feel the same way, but I really hope not. Although surely with a development as radical as this in a city like Nottingham the developers must have been in contact with the council throughout so perhaps the council may actually be for it

^^ Dosn't look like they've been into contact with the council at all, I've been in contacted with them this morning and they seem very surprised and reserved about this development. They say they can see the conservative groups coming out in full force against this one.

We're going to have to bring back NDCF to counter them.

Well thats just ridiculous, I reckon this will be reduced to 30 storeys at best :ohno:

Don't be negative. Yes Nimby's will complain but what about? It's not in a historical area, it doesn't block views and it's currently on a site which looks like it's been flattened by a bomb.
That said I'd much rather have it reduced to something like 30 storeys than have it completely scrapped.

yeah I agree with all them points steff but the idiots wont, they always find something to complain about. They will say "it sticks out like a sore thumb" but youve got to start somewhere, this could be the start of a little mini cluster. I remember seeing a document not that long ago that had another 5 sites earmarked for tall buildings around that area

We'll have to wait and see what happens. 50 storey's is alot taller than 21 for Biocity and 19 for Eastside but it's a start. With another two towers around the 30-35 storey mark I think it'll fit in very nicely. Sort of like how 1 Canada Square is the pinnacle of Canary Wharf the Ian Simpson Tower will be the pinnacle of Eastside.

If you remember when this first came up in the EP business section it did say that chek whyte industries were about to have some disscusions about this project with the council and at that time they said anything up to 40 storeys after all these months of talking with the council they have come up with 50 storeys.I would have thought that if there were no chance of getting a big tower chek whyte industries would not have wasted their time on a 50 storey,hopefully anyway

That was my thinking scooby

^^ Dosn't look like they've been into contact with the council at all, I've been in contacted with them this morning and they seem very surprised and reserved about this development. They say they can see the conservative groups coming out in full force against this one.

.

that does not sound very good

I love the bio city tower. Could that be made the 50 storey one? Sorry to put a damper on everyone's high spirits, but the chequered cladding will look dated in 20 years and risks being another mistake on the Nottingham skyline - just look at what was considered 'cool' once on Maid Marian way.

I do think that this is an unreasonable criticism in a way:

Of course anything built now will look "dated" in 20 years. It will be "dated" in twenty years!

By the same token, Victorian architecture looked dated for much of its life (which is why people were happy to bulldoze it to build exciting modern arcitecture like Maid Marian Way).

Yes, any tower built with that chequerboard style of glazing will be able to be dated to the period 2005-2015, but so what? The only way to avoid building something that will look glaringly "old-fashioned" at some point is to build in some pastiche style.

I agree Binge.

I was also told that "it may be better received being away from the historically important / sensitive parts of the city skyline and also if it can be recognised as a landmark building for such a prestigious and ground breaking commercial development."

Bare in mind what I said about the consultation. Civic Society agreed that if it can be recognised as landmark, is away from the historical areas then they are cool with tall buildings.

I think these groups like Chek Whyte anyway. He's done a lot of conservation work. Civic Society has loads of stuff about him on their website.

Gothic is there any chance you could change the title of the thread I created in the highrise section on the main page?
I've tried to do it but it would only let me do it once.

NOTTINGHAM | Chek Whyte & Ian Simpson Tower | 50 & 21fl | 150 & 88m | Pro or is that too long?

I do think that this is an unreasonable criticism in a way:

Of course anything built now will look "dated" in 20 years. It will be "dated" in twenty years!

By the same token, Victorian architecture looked dated for much of its life (which is why people were happy to bulldoze it to build exciting modern arcitecture like Maid Marian Way).

Yes, any tower built with that chequerboard style of glazing will be able to be dated to the period 2005-2015, but so what? The only way to avoid building something that will look glaringly "old-fashioned" at some point is to build in some pastiche style.

I disagree. When I say "dated" I don't literally mean by age - I mean, aesthetics won't stand the test of time in terms of appreciation. There are plenty of buildings from the last century that have retained aesthetics throughout their life and look to do so in the future. Others do not.

I think the reaction of the forum expresses the problem; excitement and aspiration to see it get built just because Nottingham will then have a proper skyscraper. Nottingham's skyline is blighted with horrible buildings and I'm disappointed planners and architects have not learnt. Do you think these proposals will become notable Nottingham landmarks? No of course not. They're mediocre and will date quickly. Indeed if it was a "pastiche" design or just an elegant generic glass box then I'd say different.

This criticism said, there is a possibility this scraper could compliment Nottingham's skyline... The Gherkin in the City of London for example helped remove the 'dated' look of the Natwest Tower. They both compliment each other well.

I'm struggling to understand what exactly it is that you feel about the simpsons towers (all of them) that will not stand the test of time?

^^ Personally, for me, it's the cladding. Do you remember all those squares and triangles and bright colours that you saw everywhere during the 80s? That's what it reminds me of but brought "up to date".

It's just a personal opinion. I would love to see some scrapers in Notts (with maid marian way and the victoria centre pulled down). I went to uni there and still often go back. The city is an exceptional example of great bustling place to live, work or study that appears to be thriving (even with unfair press!). All this despite it's size.

Have you got an example of the "bright colours of the 80's?".

So don't you think the Hilton Tower in Manchester or the Gherkin will look cool in say 20/30 years time??

Aesthetics is really not much more than a substitute for "taste" or even "fashion", though, isn't it? Who is to say whether this aesthetic will last? Nobody actually builds a structure thinking it will look shit in twenty years, do they?

Anyway, why is somewhere like Maid Marian Way so wretched? Surely it's not really about the aesthetics of the buildings (the facades, the materials, the shapes), so much as the way the street cuts through the medieval street pattern of the city, separating Old Market Square from the castle, and the mass of buildings that then dominates the view of the city from the castle and from further afield. You could replace any of the bland towers on Maid Marian Way with an elegant "Gherkin" style design and it'd still be inappropriate.

Personally, despite being on these forums, I'm not so enamored of tall buildings that I necessarily want to see them in Nottingham. I'm more excited by this project because it seems to signal a start on real redevelopment in that wasted area of the city, rather than because it's tall.

But equally, I do think that the opposite view (the Civic Society opinion that retaining the city skyline is a prime objective) is crazy because - as you say - the present Nottingham skyline, whilst containing some gems when viewed from various angles, is currently dominated entirely by mediocrity: the buildings of Maid Marian Way, Victoria Centre etc.

Been a while since i have been on here due to internet problems.

All i have to say is wowsers!

If this gets built it could really spark more of these high rises.

A great addition for the Nottingham and the East Midlands

:banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana::banana:

Binge... again I agree entirely mate.

1000 views in this post already lads. The development has sparked a real interest in Notts.

Have you got an example of the "bright colours of the 80's?".

So don't you think the Hilton Tower in Manchester or the Gherkin will look cool in say 20/30 years time??

I cannot off the top of my head think of a building that screams 80s - because we didn't exactly have a building boom then... I can think of underground stations or shopping centres that sum up what I feel...

No, i think both of those towers will look good in 20/30 years time.

Again, it's just a personal opinion. Maybe as more realistic renders come out I'll change my mind.


Aesthetics is really not much more than a substitute for "taste" or even "fashion", though, isn't it? Who is to say whether this aesthetic will last? Nobody actually builds a structure thinking it will look shit in twenty years, do they?

Precisely. That's why I keep saying it's a personal opinion!


Anyway, why is somewhere like Maid Marian Way so wretched? Surely it's not really about the aesthetics of the buildings (the facades, the materials, the shapes), so much as the way the street cuts through the medieval street pattern of the city, separating Old Market Square from the castle, and the mass of buildings that then dominates the view of the city from the castle and from further afield. You could replace any of the bland towers on Maid Marian Way with an elegant "Gherkin" style design and it'd still be inappropriate.


Well if you're not bothered about the aesthetics of the buildings, then that is up to you. Maid Marian way though - come on, urghghg those hotels and tacky fronts?


Personally, despite being on these forums, I'm not so enamored of tall buildings that I necessarily want to see them in Nottingham. I'm more excited by this project because it seems to signal a start on real redevelopment in that wasted area of the city, rather than because it's tall.

But equally, I do think that the opposite view (the Civic Society opinion that retaining the city skyline is a prime objective) is crazy because - as you say - the present Nottingham skyline, whilst containing some gems when viewed from various angles, is currently dominated entirely by mediocrity: the buildings of Maid Marian Way, Victoria Centre etc.

I absolutely agree. I can't wait to see Nottingham in a decade or so. It has so much going for it. :D

Well if you're not bothered about the aesthetics of the buildings, then that is up to you. Maid Marian way though - come on, urghghg those hotels and tacky fronts?

Oh, I think we can all agree that they are horrible! Cheap materials that aren't maintained correctly or even cleaned.

But, for me, that surface detailing is not as wretched as the mass of the buildings in that spot, along a city centre dual carriageway that carved up the historical street pattern and destroyed the natural footfall of the city.

As a contrast, I think that the external aesthetic of the Cornerhouse in Nottingham is also pretty horrible. That actually has a lot of 80's style detailing to me - mismatching, plasticky stuck-on facade, etc.

But the Cornerhouse is, in terms of its form and use, a really beneficial city centre building - a city centre cinema (rather than an out of town multiplex) and leisure complex, built close to public transport, and opposite a theatre and concert hall (providing a natural and not self-concious "cultural quarter") with a certain glitzy, blowsy charm.

My point is that the aesthetic can not be to one's taste, but the building might still work really well in its context. The high-rises on Maid Marian way do neither. The Chek White tower should at least provide a great regenerative boost to that Eastside area, in an appropriate area for a tall tower, even if you don't care for the particular external appearance.

On a project of this size,will it have to go to a public enquiry like the trams?

Not necessarily, unlikely.

We'll have a chance to submit an opinion through the usual planning application commenting process. Once the app has been submitted i'll post a link.

thats a good idea,we need to give as much support for this project as possible

I'll definately be signing it. Im sure the Evening Post will write a column on it in which sad people with no friends will then write a letter complaining about it blocking views when though they live in Hucknall or somewhere miles away.

I bet you evening post will offer a negative approach to this development. They will fully back the civic society in order to make this development seem controversial to help sell more papers. Just like they're doing with the tram...

Of course they will. I don't understand why they do it. From what I've seen the Leicester Mercury always has columns on developments but they never slate them like the Evening post do.

It is rubbish.

If they got nehind developments then i am sure the stupid people in this city would get behind things more.

The majority of people who oppose things like this are extremely defferential.

Some of them seem so against development in this city it is a wonder they are still not holding out for things to still be built from whattle and daub!

The owners of the evening post are probably members of the heritige groups or are good friends of theirs

What do you think our old forumer Bobthebuilder would make of this? :lol:
Tbh most of the people who complain about these sort of developments probably have no interest whatsoever in architecture and urban planning. It's just something for them to complain about.

I bet they'll make over exaggerated renders of the towers to put people off, as they did with the Leicester towers.

Some of them seem so against development in this city it is a wonder they are still not holding out for things to still be built from whattle and daub!

I agree , if it was left to some people we would all still be living in caves.some people just seem scared of progess.

Wow...happy new year!

Where did 50 storeys come from?! Last I heard we were down to 30. A second tower too. I love the design of the taller tower, the shape, the crown, very elegant... has to be one of the best outside London. Not sure about the cladding, depends on the finish think it looks interesting in the renders but have seen how cheap this looks on the Beetham towers. Im not too worried though....Mr Whyte has made his name restoring listed buildings so he wont be afraid to invest in some expensive materials!

Not so enthusiastic about the shorter tower, its less graceful and IMO less becoming to Nottingham. It is a shame it doesnt relate better to the taller one. Though Im dubious Bio City would be in a position to take a pre-let on such a large amount of space, perhaps the floorplates have been designed with that type of use in mind (though I wouldnt expect the tower to be a transparent as suggested by the renders).

It will be fascinating to see how this plays out through planning. Its easy to be pessimistic and a height reduction would seem inevitable. I am nervous about the proximity of the site to the Lace Market and there will be some for whom a building on this scale will be considered totally out of the question. Then again there are no nearby residents to upset like Brook St and I would expect Chek Whyte to be more determined than Lace Market Properties. The history of the site is also interesting, planning permission was refused for an apartment development on this site a couple of years ago. The reason for refusal was that the design wasnt considered to meet the Council's aspirations for new buildings in the area. This seemed weird as the design was actually totally inoffensive and similar to a lot of other stuff that they were permitting at the time. The developers took it to Appeal and won. Chek Whyte could implement this old scheme if he wanted to, something the planners/councillors will be desperate to avoid, having been over-ruled at Appeal. This could be a useful bargaining tool.... and the Council can hardly say they havent got an aspirational proposal now!

If it can get through planning (and assuming no major economic downturn) I would be hopeful of a quick start as I dont think Chek Whyte likes to mess about!

Furry I was just waiting for you to come on and see this. I knew you would have a lot to say.

Not so enthusiastic about the shorter tower, its less graceful and IMO less becoming to Nottingham. It is a shame it doesnt relate better to the taller one.

Thats what I thought at first. Being the same development I expected them to be a little more similar. Thinking about it though it will add a little variety to the skyline.,

I actually like the design of both towers. I love the way the small one hangs over the ground level.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2312/2153960487_444dc79845_o.jpg

Though Im dubious Bio City would be in a position to take a pre-let on such a large amount of space, perhaps the floorplates have been designed with that type of use in mind (though I wouldnt expect the tower to be a transparent as suggested by the renders).

Take a look at this quote:
(http://www.biocity.co.uk/DocsRepository/0/2/9/508/extension.pdf)
And BioCity bosses are already looking to plan a fourth phase.

BioCity chief executive Dr Glenn Crocker said companies at the Pennyfoot Street site were growing at a rate of 35% a year and the science park would need a 75,000 sq ft fourth phase.

The smaller tower has a total of 105,505 sq ft inside. They need 75,000 sq ft. And remember they've got some big organisations behind them.

If it can get through planning (and assuming no major economic downturn) I would be hopeful of a quick start as I dont think Chek Whyte likes to mess about!

If you remember when the story first came out ,they also said that funding was already in place for this preoject which should speed things along a bit, hopefully.

So don't you think the Hilton Tower in Manchester or the Gherkin will look cool in say 20/30 years time??

well the hilton tower will look incredibly dated, and like half the buildings on the manchester skyline. ian simpson is simply designing too many buildings that look too alike.

I agree. I think the problems are the cladding.

I sent an email out to a number of prolific developers, architects and planning officers I found out about this project and I received an email back from Julian Marsh this morning who simply say "I won't be supporting a 50 storey tower in the Eastside".

Thanks Julian....I wonder if he bothered to even look at the design before shooting off that reply.

Who is julian marsh, is he a planning officer?

One of the most prolific and a somewhat influential architect from Notts.

http://www.marsh-grochowski.com/

Lets hope he doesnt sit on the Urban Design Panel!

if he objected to this project ,how much weight would his objections have among the planning officers? would it not just be seen as him not wanting the competition on his door step rather than anything else.

I think you have to give Julian Marsh credit for a little more integrity than that!

Part of his architectural ethos is a strong commitment to sustainable architecture. I expect that, purely on those grounds, a 50 storey skyscraper doesn't fit his criteria of a suitable building.

There will be plenty of people who object to a building of this size in Nottingham as it is so different to what's there already. That doesn't mean they are all backwards Nimbyists.

(Personally, I feel a tall tower like this is less intrusive and problematic than, say, the expansion of the Broadmarsh to collossal proportions and the subsequent privatisation of a huge swathe of central Nottingham.)

Firstly I don't usually comment on other cities BUT I thought I would on this project. Firstly I think that Nottingham is a great place, shopping, bars and restaurants are great and the feel of the place is compact.

However there isn't a great deal of tall buildings and so a 50 story building would surely be a little out of place, at least for a while?

Despite this being "skyscrapercity" I feel that all buildings have to take alot into consideration and one is the effect on the surrouding buildings.

Obviously this isn't too far in developement but perhaps a 30 story may look better even perhaps a 40 better? From the renders this tower is unbelievably dominating.

Other than that though this looks like a promising development and if it goes ahead, the height will be an interesting issue to see. I'm not suggesting this is a bad development but perhaps the tower may be too tall.

Be interesting to see what you and the council think?

I don't know perhaps Im way off and this will make a great landmark and addition to the area!

There will be plenty of people who object to a building of this size in Nottingham as it is so different to what's there already. That doesn't mean they are all backwards Nimbyists.

)

I was not trying to suggest that everyone who complains about this development is a nimbyist,im sure there will be lots of objections from intelligent people who have genuine and valid concerns about this development.As far as Julian Marsh is concerned,i think i better do a bit more reasearch on him before i make any more comments:lol:

Firstly I don't usually comment on other cities BUT I thought I would on this project. Firstly I think that Nottingham is a great place, shopping, bars and restaurants are great and the feel of the place is compact.

However there isn't a great deal of tall buildings and so a 50 story building would surely be a little out of place, at least for a while?

Despite this being "skyscrapercity" I feel that all buildings have to take alot into consideration and one is the effect on the surrouding buildings.

Obviously this isn't too far in developement but perhaps a 30 story may look better even perhaps a 40 better? From the renders this tower is unbelievably dominating.

Other than that though this looks like a promising development and if it goes ahead, the height will be an interesting issue to see. I'm not suggesting this is a bad development but perhaps the tower may be too tall.

Be interesting to see what you and the council think?

I don't know perhaps Im way off and this will make a great landmark and addition to the area!

My points aren't a response to you as such, they are a response to everyone who will oppose the development because I feel their views are going to be similar to yours.

Many are going to say this building is going to dominate in the way you just have, so here are my questions...

Will this building dominate at ground level? When you take into considerations whats going to happen at eastside city begins and possibly the stuff thats going to happen further north (bus stations, sneinton market etc), it this development dominate at ground level? I personally don't think so. It won't be a much more significant than any other the other buildings in the area??

Re the skyline: many are going to say this building is going to stand out. My response to that is.. so what? Is that a bad thing?

Lets look at why this could be considered a bad thing.. I can think of three reasons:

1. It will take attention away from the only things on our skyline worth protecting (the castle, lace market escarpment, CH Dome, etc).

I feel I have 2 points to counter this. Firstly, the only way to stop attention being taking away from our historical landmarks willl be to stop Nottingham building buildings over 25 storeys. Just about anything over that height would take attention away from our historic buildings. Would we really want to limit Nottingham is this way? Secondly, most if the buildings that will be built will in the future will almost certainly all be on one side of the skyline and away from all the historical landmarks anyway!

2. It dominates the skyline.

A building this height would be a new Iconic addition to our skyline. Yes, it will stand out more than anything else but what's wrong with that? Is that a bad thing? Does it make our skyline look worse that it is?? What wrong with the skyline having one iconic building? What wrong with the skyline having a focal point?

The twin towers were much taller than anything else on the new york skyline. Did this make the new york skyline look any worse??

http://z.about.com/d/architecture/1/0/h/F/worldtrade-corel.jpg

3. It could look bad in 50 years time.

We can concern ourselves with aesthetics all day long but the reality is no on really knows what is going to look good and what is going to look bad in 50 years time.

My question is why should Nottingham City not go ahead and support this ambitious project?? What other reasons are their? I think it would be interesting to also ask if anyone has views different from mine?

:applause:

The tower proposed for Nottingham looks great! I can't see any reason for it not going ahead. Good luck...

Being 50 storeys and dominating is the whole point of this skyscraper. It reminds me of the way Telecom Tower dominates that part of London.

I feel that as a one off, that Nottingham could sustain a building of this type.

All sizable cities in this country need to shed this apologetic attitude towards their surroundings. This big village attitude is know longer appropriate to todays modern world.

Good response danz013, you obviously know more about the area than me.

Yes I see what you mean with skscrapers whole point is to dominate the skyline, It was just a concern thats all.

50 storeys just seemed a little too large at the moment perhaps. I don't know, it does have to be considered that aspect of it anyway!

Thanks Steely, like I say that wasn't a response to you as such. Naturally, I want this high rise to go ahead because I love towers. The reason I joined this thread was because at the time everyone was getting ready to write to the council and LMP because of brook street lol.

Since joining the forum and starting New Nottingham I've had the chance to quiz and question some big players in the game (developers, architects, the council) and they usually have some pretty good counters to my arguments.... so good that I usually end up agreeing and backing down. Because of this, I now have much more of a 'listen and learn' type of approach, I also try to think of all possible angles of argument before committing myself to an opinion. When people like Julian Marsh step up and say I won't support this I'll usually listen carefully and take on board what they've got to say because whilst I've only just begun to take an interest in sort of stuff, these people are pros, they know the industry and have been doing this all of their lifes and therefore I respect their opinion much more than I did before.

But it stands at the moment. I just can't think of an realistic and respectable arguments to counter the development of this project.

I have calculated that the building will be 146m and the smaller building will be 78m

146m is quite small to say it's 50 storeys although being primarily residential it's bound to be smaller.
It'll be nearlly double the height of Victoria flats. I don't think that's too overbearing tbh. Viccy Flats look alot taller than they actually are especially when driving into the city centre from Mansfield Road.

It'll be 151 to the crown top of the crown.

Danz - I would like to cut out that post(*) and frame it. This forum (and the internet in general) is full of people who know nothing spouting shite about the stuff they know nothing about (myself very much included). It is a privilege to hear someone say "yes, experts have more expertise than I do, so I bow to their better judgement." Lots of people online seem to think that to do so is a sign of weakness or an affront to their "freedom of speech". I think it's a sign of being flexible, adult and adaptable.

Anyway, some possible counter-arguments:

Sustainability. Very tall towers aren't very green. Power intensive. Need for powered air conditioning etc. There's not a shortage of derelict land in the immediate area that needs redeveloping, so there is still plenty of space to offer more sustainable architectural solutions - still dense, urban structures, but not towers. We don't actually need a tall tower.

Character. Nottingham is a city which is still based on a medieval street plan, and the unique topography of the area, where the low lying marshes to the south rises to Castle Rock and the lace Market, with the central area in between filled with the Market Square. This structure respects none of the unique character of the city, and will destroy long-standing views from the south and east. It provides a permanent eyesore that will not be removed for possibly hundreds of years.

Commercial viability: the site is next to a development site which has lain mostly dormant for almost a decade. There are current plans to build here (which have been generally well received) which could be adversely affected by the arrival of a huge tower on a neighbouring site.

Flats: more frickin' one/two bedroom flats!! Way to concentrate the urban population into one demographic!

Aesthetics: it's just a tower, very similar to other tall towers being built in larger cities across Britain. It offers nothing unique to Nottingham in terms of design. It does nothing particular to address its situation. It's not "iconic", except as the tallest structure in the city.

Discuss!

(*Post 102, not that last one. That was rubbish...)

i find it difficult to understand the people who object to a 50 storey tower for nottingham,

any city of any importance has skyscrapers, they are the pinacle of modern
urban architecture. any old shit for brains can see that

perhaps we should just build a carpark instead. or a new asda supermarket at least that way it won´t threaten the stagnating people who object to these things. They probably still use coal fires and have those cars that you have to wind up

in fact why dont we just burn the whole fucking city down, that way it´ll be more medieval, we could start shitting in the streets too.

for fucks sake

But it stands at the moment. I just can't think of an realistic and respectable arguments to counter the development of this project.

The only thing i can think of in regards to this,which they may bring up and have to look into, is the effect a large tower will have on the nearby roads in regards to will they cope with the extra traffic.Wasnt that one of the arguments they came up with for the original plans for brook st ?

i find it difficult to understand the people who object to a 50 storey tower for nottingham,

any city of any importance has skyscrapers, they are the pinacle of modern
urban architecture. any old shit for brains can see that

perhaps we should just build a carpark instead. or a new asda supermarket at least that way it won´t threaten the stagnating people who object to these things. They probably still use coal fires and have those cars that you have to wind up

in fact why dont we just burn the whole fucking city down, that way it´ll be more medieval, we could start shitting in the streets too.

for fucks sake

I totally agree with your sentiments. City's of Nottingham, Leicester and even Derby's size should stop being influenced from the primative past.

In the Western world our cities are backward. 4th richest economy in the world. Nottingham is easily ranked in the top 10 of wealthy cities in the UK and we can't imagine a 50 storey skyscrapers ? WHY ON EARTH NOT !

My idea of a city is to distance yourself from the country and the suburbs to experience the best mankind can achieve, sophistication , buzz, wow factor.

It would seem there are too many people who want their cake and to eat it. The benefits of urban living but as long as things don't get too exciting.

As a result cities become bland non events somewhere to avoid or get out of quickly just somewhere to shop, moan and complain about car park prices. Before getting back to the suburban low-rise semi to cut the lawn put the cuttings on the compost heap. Truth is the majority of the British don't really want to live in or value modern cities.


Ian Simpson realizes it's time to move out the primeval swamp !

Sound like a very keen "scraperist" if there is such a thing danz!

Yeah I try to take everthing on board too, I mean one problem with alot of new develoments is the size of the individual apartments etc, then theres local amenities.

Take a look at the development near Leeds Train Station (NotBridgewater). The apartments aren't large and theres no local shop or local pub!

I've put this in the "Rate Our Talls" section on the main page to see what other people think of it.
So far most of the scores in the UK forum have been positive so let's see what people abroad think of it.

Here's the link: http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=565078

i find it difficult to understand the people who object to a 50 storey tower for nottingham,

any city of any importance has skyscrapers, they are the pinacle of modern
urban architecture. any old shit for brains can see that

perhaps we should just build a carpark instead. or a new asda supermarket at least that way it won´t threaten the stagnating people who object to these things. They probably still use coal fires and have those cars that you have to wind up

in fact why dont we just burn the whole fucking city down, that way it´ll be more medieval, we could start shitting in the streets too.

for fucks sake


What a load of bollocks. Skyscrapers are indeed a common feature of economically prosperous, heavily populated urban areas, but make a city they do not.

I think you need to look at other aspiring cities if you look at somewhere like Barcelona and the Torre Agbar this tower all office space does dominate the area of the city it is built in, with other areas around it being primarily low rise. However as long as the building is of suficient quality, though the Torre does seem to copy the Gherkin. It does not detract but complimets other building on the skyline such as the Sagrada Familia. I'm sure there were objections at the time, but not now. The main point is that what is built should be of the highest quality.

Danz - I would like to cut out that post(*) and frame it. This forum (and the internet in general) is full of people who know nothing spouting shite about the stuff they know nothing about (myself very much included). It is a privilege to hear someone say "yes, experts have more expertise than I do, so I bow to their better judgement." Lots of people online seem to think that to do so is a sign of weakness or an affront to their "freedom of speech". I think it's a sign of being flexible, adult and adaptable.

I agree entirely. Binge i think you've come up with some justifiable counters. I'm not sure those arguments individually should be enough to stop something like this going ahead. All of them together.... maybe but I still think the benifits we would get from something like this would outweigh the whole lot of them.

Sustainability. Very tall towers aren't very green. Power intensive. Need for powered air conditioning etc. There's not a shortage of derelict land in the immediate area that needs redeveloping, so there is still plenty of space to offer more sustainable architectural solutions - still dense, urban structures, but not towers. We don't actually need a tall tower.

I personally think this is probably one of the best arguments against the tower. We don't know their plans though. What if its powered by EnviroEnergy? They've been looking to expand? Its only round the corner and would make a lot of sense (especially after the council gave them a loan to expand it).

Its a solution, and i'm sure there will be others.

Character. Nottingham is a city which is still based on a medieval street plan, and the unique topography of the area, where the low lying marshes to the south rises to Castle Rock and the lace Market, with the central area in between filled with the Market Square. This structure respects none of the unique character of the city, and will destroy long-standing views from the south and east. It provides a permanent eyesore that will not be removed for possibly hundreds of years.

What views are their from the south to the east? The windmill? What is there to look at over there that we need to protect other than that? Most views from South to East will already be messed by what is going to happen at the Eastside though won't they?

Commercial viability: the site is next to a development site which has lain mostly dormant for almost a decade. There are current plans to build here (which have been generally well received) which could be adversely affected by the arrival of a huge tower on a neighbouring site.

Possibly, but I actually thought it would boost this Eastside Plans though? This plan has a minor 10,000 sq m of office space compared with the 150,000 sqm that will be created in the Eastside Development.

At the moment I struggle to see how this would have an adverse effect on the Eastside plans. If someone could show me that it would have adverse effect on the Eastside than I would happily take away my support for this tower because I'd much prefer Eastside gets going.

Flats: more frickin' one/two bedroom flats!! Way to concentrate the urban population into one demographic!

Isn't this the one place where we would want 1/2 bedroom flats? Your not going to get many families that want to live in a 50 floor tower with their kids?

I think you need to look at other aspiring cities if you look at somewhere like Barcelona and the Torre Agbar this tower all office space does dominate the area of the city it is built in, with other areas around it being primarily low rise. However as long as the building is of suficient quality, though the Torre does seem to copy the Gherkin. It does not detract but complimets other building on the skyline such as the Sagrada Familia. I'm sure there were objections at the time, but not now. The main point is that what is built should be of the highest quality.

Is this the tower your on about? I took these pics last april.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2057/2162794634_98058428a5.jpg?v=0

Right next to that building was this. I'm not sure how well I think the two fit in together. I don't see how the tower does anything for that little run down community beside it though im sure it will spark the regeneration of the area.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2357/2161996241_c2b164c6cc.jpg?v=0

I think the point about views and character would be that the tower would dramatically alter the character of the skyline, from one where the natural topography dominates to one where a bloody great tower block catches the eye. It's not that it would "get in the way" as such, just that it would wholeheartedly dominate the cityscape. A new, better (even if bigger) tower would therefore improve the current skyline.

The counter-argument to that would be that we are forty years too late in that regard, and the real skyline damage was done in the 60s and 70s as the Maid Marian Way blocks and the Victoria Centre were constructed.

^^ Exactly.

I just think that this tower is away from everything that is worth protecting, preserving etc. It is a little close to the Lace Market though.

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2083/2149115047_189588b4f2_o.jpg

Just a quick note: The Lower Parliament Information has now been removed from Chek Whytes website.

We obviously weren't supposed to know yet.

Anyway, some possible counter-arguments:

Sustainability. Very tall towers aren't very green. Power intensive. Need for powered air conditioning etc. There's not a shortage of derelict land in the immediate area that needs redeveloping, so there is still plenty of space to offer more sustainable architectural solutions - still dense, urban structures, but not towers. We don't actually need a tall tower.

Looks like Messrs Whyte and Simpson have already thought of this one.... http://www.chekwhyteindustries.co.uk/...click on "About Us" and in the top right there is a reference to Simpson's "iconic, net zero carbon emissions building".
:cheers:

Character. Nottingham is a city which is still based on a medieval street plan, and the unique topography of the area, where the low lying marshes to the south rises to Castle Rock and the lace Market, with the central area in between filled with the Market Square. This structure respects none of the unique character of the city, and will destroy long-standing views from the south and east. It provides a permanent eyesore that will not be removed for possibly hundreds of years.

This will obviously be the most contentious issue. The city still bares the scars of insensitive development in the 60s and 70s. In the public mind tall buildings automatically = poor design. I understand the need to protect views to the Lace Market, Castle Rock and the Council House. But the site is off-set from these historical areas - as Dan says it wouldnt obscure or block views. I have sympathy with your point that this tower would distract attention from and overshadow the topography of the city. But something so radically tall and different could equally serve to highlight the older parts of the city and draw attention to the skyline. The best cities, places such as Barcelona, use modern architecture to do this and create a great buzz. Dont forget the planners and councillors have shown they arent afraid to back daring and unusual modern architecture even in the most sensitive of historic locations (think Pod and CCAN). Provided CCAN works out ok I think Fletcher Gate will be the most interesting part of the city because of the great interplay between the old and the new.

Commercial viability: the site is next to a development site which has lain mostly dormant for almost a decade. There are current plans to build here (which have been generally well received) which could be adversely affected by the arrival of a huge tower on a neighbouring site.

It seems unlikely that the amount of floor space created by the two towers would prejudice the Eastside scheme which is significantly larger and will be built in phases. More likely, the towers would make the Eastside and City Scheme a more attractive investment.

Flats: more frickin' one/two bedroom flats!! Way to concentrate the urban population into one demographic!

Danz pro-argument seems a good one....families just arent going to be interested in living up a 50 floor tower. Whats more a significant part of the demand for housing is being driven by the growth of small households which still far outstrips the rate at which 1-2 bed flats are being built! Also the developers could do something similar to one of the Leeds (?) tower schemes where they are providing a certain proportion of the flats for the elderly.

Aesthetics: it's just a tower, very similar to other tall towers being built in larger cities across Britain. It offers nothing unique to Nottingham in terms of design. It does nothing particular to address its situation. It's not "iconic", except as the tallest structure in the city.

A skyscraper is unlikely to be "unique" to a particular city because it represents an international style of architecture. This is not neccessarily a bad thing as a tower such as this says that Nottingham is part of the new global economy, it confers status on the city and suggests that this is a prosperous and self-confident place. In truth this is what most skyscrapers are all about and it would seem this is part of the motivation for Chek Whytes "vision". Of course there is also good and bad skyscraper design and from the renders we have seen so far the design appears to be of a high quality (better than many towers being built in larger British cities). I dont see how the Gherkin reflects the City of London in its design (it could have been built anywhere) but it has become an icon of London because it is a well designed tall buiding. We could hope for a ground-breaking design at Lower Parliament Street but at present the reality is that this would never be viable in a city of the size and status of Nottingham.

Looks like Messrs Whyte and Simpson have already thought of this one.... http://www.chekwhyteindustries.co.uk/...click on "About Us" and in the top right there is a reference to Simpson's "iconic, net zero carbon emissions building".
:cheers:

I agree with everything you said furry... but well spotted mate! Zero emmisions!

How's he going to do that then? Enviro-Energy wouldn't be Zero Emissions would it? They burn rubbish all day long so it can't be carbon free.

Can't see any windmills? Maybe this cladding is full of solar panels lol.

Ha! maybe....

Another thing Ive spotted is that the renders seem to mix up the elevations on the main tower.


http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2060/2146117795_ef61af797e_o.jpg

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2392/2146118083_fe52e182fb_o.jpg

Both these images are taken from the east but the main tower is facing different ways. Personally I think the planed side should probably face inwards towards the city centre.

^Agreed, planed section seems to have just plain glass, no checkered sections, offering a better view of the city centre for apartment owners wanting to see the hustle and bustle below. And it would show of the more interesting design features to the people gazing up from the streets below/city centre.

holy shit!

love the smaller tower - loks like one that went up in NY a year or 2 ago, especially at the base (which is quality).

cladding is the issue tho, needs to be a bit more original and DEFINITELY a different colour scheme to all the other simpson towers. varying shades of grey glass and steel? better than the blue and green.

def the right location, no question. mintos!

I agree that the planed side should face the city centre.

I just cant seem to make sense of this night time render. I've tried to look at the video to see which angle its coming from but it dosn't make sense. You might be right furry.

Heres a higher resolution video:

www.newnottingham.com/downloads/ChekWhyte.zip

Well as far as I know the tower will have been designed with some environmental concerns in mind as the City Council either will be or already do require "10% of energy supplied (interpreted through carbon emissions) in all new developments over 1,000 square metres to be gained on-site and renewably and /or from a decentralised, renewable or low carbon, energy supply"

http://www.nottinghamcity.gov.uk/sitemap/services/environment/planning/sustainability/cd_planning-renewables.htm

I am a little concerned that the proposal has been taken down off of Checks website. Probably just paranoia on my part brought about by years of delays and seemingly never materialised promises (Brook Street, Broadmarsh, Eastside etc.)

^^ Don't worry about that. I've checked that website every day for the last few weeks.

It was clearly a website in construction that hadn't been finished yet. It was clearly unfinished in every way possible. The LPS Website shouldn't have been online yet.

Danz. You are right as the Torre Agbar sits at the minute it is a bit of a run down area however the roundabout it site on Glories is to have a huge makeover. The main traffic is to run undrerground with huge regeneration over the area. I am heading there in April so will see if I can get any more pics. There is a thread in the spanish forum but its a nightmare trying to find it

^^ Don't worry about that. I've checked that website every day for the last few weeks.

It was clearly a website in construction that hadn't been finished yet. It was clearly unfinished in every way possible. The LPS Website shouldn't have been online yet.

You realise that by drawing attention to it, you have probably scuppered any chance of it becoming reality. Remember everybody, when the site is filled with boxy student flats with six storey elevations (reducing to four storey elevations at the front to avoid unnecessary "massing") IT'S ALL DANZ'S FAULT!!!

:lol: Thats not my fault! Its theirs!

danz013 link is www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=418949 scroll through the pages and you can see some details of what they areproposing and what is possible with a little determination and imagination

danz013 link is www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=418949 scroll through the pages and you can see some details of what they areproposing and what is possible with a little determination and imagination

I can't speak spanish! I can see some interesting images on there though.

I must say, I take back what I said about it. I had a look a t a few images of it it yesterday and it is very interesting what it is doing for the area. I like it and I like it a lot. And I love those night time colours. I wonder if anything like that would EVER EVER EVER get approved down here.

Not a chance, no council in this country would be daring enough. On another note the Torre changes colour at night and the local nickname is the cigar.

Can't believe i've come back to this. This looks to be the perfect tower in the perfect place. Fingers crossed.

It seems as if there is quite a bit of opposition if the backward-looking hicks who post on this thread are anything to go by:

http://www.leftlion.co.uk/forum/index.php?topic=13776.0

This lot make even the Sheffield Forum posters look progressive.

Sounds like a bunch of nimbys who dont know a lot about a lot. I posted a big list of all the developments in Notts and they just about said all of them didn't make sense.

^its just ppl who have less interest in all this sort of thing, theyre right; it does look like a massive cock. i'd prefer it if the tower looked a bit more original!

Actually, I find that thread has a healthy cynicism that might not be very well informed, but is not a million a miles away from the truth:

I'm undecided at present, would be quite a statement but i'm not sure what that statement is, probably something like:

'Look we have a massive building (but only one and it looks a bit like a cock) and is probably going to end up being half empty. But hey we are better than Leicester and Derby so who cares how much it cost!'

Surely that sums up this forum quite well!

I would say a very UNhealthy cynicism. They sound like a right laugh, I hope I bump into them on a night out around Notts - be a riot

Not a chance, no council in this country would be daring enough. On another note the Torre changes colour at night and the local nickname is the cigar.

Can you imagine what it would get called if something like that got built here?
I'll leave that to your imagination.

'Look we have a massive building (but only one and it looks a bit like a cock) and is probably going to end up being half empty. But hey we are better than Leicester and Derby so who cares how much it cost!'

That quote didn't sum up the forum for me.
Its one building sure but I would think the first not last in the city. Probably wont be half empty if the hotel part is 4/5 star as Nottingham is lacking. Office Space is also sorely required, and no offense but since when did anyone on this forum feel Nottingham is competeing exclusively with Leicester and Derby. Infact I would hazard a guess and say no-one would argue Nottingham is in competition with them at all.

'Look we have a massive building (but only one and it looks a bit like a cock) and is probably going to end up being half empty. But hey we are better than Leicester and Derby so who cares how much it cost!'

That quote didn't sum up the forum for me.
Its one building sure but I would think the first not last in the city. Probably wont be half empty if the hotel part is 4/5 star as Nottingham is lacking. Office Space is also sorely required, and no offense but since when did anyone on this forum feel Nottingham is competeing exclusively with Leicester and Derby. Infact I would hazard a guess and say no-one would argue Nottingham is in competition with them at all.

I agree -

Firstly.. we're all talking as if this is an ugly tower!

I personally think this is iconic.. yes it could be more iconic.. but its still iconic. Some people don't like the cladding, some people think its just tall, some people think the smaller tower should have more relation to the larger one, some people think its the right proposal in the right place, some people simply love it.

Don't you get split views like this with every groundbreaking and controversial development though?? I bet when people first saw the plans for the Lloyds building in london they looked at is thinking "WTF"!

Secondly. Maybe I don't know enough about the market but do you guys really think this tower will stand empty? I seriously doubt it.

Finally, I agree totally ranwolf. I always considered Notts to be competing with Sheffield, Leeds and Bristol rather than Leicester and Derby lol.

One more thing....


Aesthetics: it's just a tower, very similar to other tall towers being built in larger cities across Britain. It offers nothing unique to Nottingham in terms of design. It does nothing particular to address its situation. It's not "iconic", except as the tallest structure in the city.

I dont agree... lets look at Ian Simpsons work.

Lumeire Leeds

http://www.carrerapropertyconsultancy.com/images/lumiere/lumiere-apartments.gif

Criterion Place - Leeds

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

Beethem Manchester

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1028/1211417316_a037d3c128.jpg?v=0

Holloway Circus - Birmingham

http://farm1.static.flickr.com/35/123876956_31b2ad9ca2.jpg?v=0http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1054/1098007581_38df16e70b.jpg?v=0

Westbridge Leicester

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1434/973672470_775ff5ae33_o.jpg

Heres the one in liverpool that they are saying look so much like ours...??

http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2070/2169062530_ae82010206.jpg?v=0http://img87.imageshack.us/img87/3279/liverpoolwalkabout058oh3.jpg

and heres ours... http://farm3.static.flickr.com/2060/2146117795_4b6492342e.jpg?v=0

Obviously.. the cladding is similar but apart from that I think they're all very different.

Why would anyone think a city like Nottingham would get a tower that is unique? :dunno:

Wow, ok...you go away for a week and look what happens! Ok, this really does look pretty damn good! The tower is much taller than I expected, I really didnt think we would see 50 floors.

Personally I like the design, its better than just having a plain old box stuck in the middle of the city. I think the curved design will give the building more longevity and so it wont age as fast as more conventional designs often can. This tower should also really nicely reflect the tower that we are hopefully seeing at the centre of Eastside.

I really hope this sparks off some serious design with height in mind for this part of the city. Nottingham City Council need to swing behind this and not be split. If the planning department stuffs this up, we could lose a valuable opportunity for Nottingham we wont see again for a long while.

Why would anyone think a city like Nottingham would get a tower that is unique? :dunno:

Agreed. We're never going to get anything that is earth shatteringly amazing. But to get something thats at least a proper skyscraper, in a good position and not bad to look out is a result in my book.

Wow, ok...you go away for a week and look what happens!

Pharmj, exactly my words too!

Ok then in a nutshell - I like the tower, don't like the Ian simpson cladding (I think Hilton Manchester is one of the ugliest towers I know), but I like the shape a lot. It's good for a Nottingham proposal.

I don't like the fact it's a 2 tower scheme, because I personally would have preferred to see office/hotel not residential/hotel and another seperate office. I think this may damage the ability for Eastside and City to shift the huge number of flats in their masterplan...but it's expected that flats would be a feature. 50 storeys is much taller than I expected, and I think it could suffer a lot from a major hight reduction by becoming a bit stumpy.

Overall pretty good - I'm impressed. Imagine the views from those penthouses when Eastside and City is under construction...any one wanting to buy one of those - we'd have awesome photos of everything! Communal pot... lol!

Ok then in a nutshell - I like the tower, don't like the Ian simpson cladding (I think Hilton Manchester is one of the ugliest towers I know), but I like the shape a lot. It's good for a Nottingham proposal.

This is the thing about the cladding. Its all a matter of opinion. I think the Hilton Tower is one of the most iconic high rises in the UK. I love it... whilst you hate it lol.

I love the cladding... the only think I don't like is the fact that it is in now way unique to Nottingham.

I don't like the fact it's a 2 tower scheme, because I personally would have preferred to see office/hotel not residential/hotel and another seperate office. I think this may damage the ability for Eastside and City to shift the huge number of flats in their masterplan...but it's expected that flats would be a feature. 50 storeys is much taller than I expected, and I think it could suffer a lot from a major hight reduction by becoming a bit stumpy.

This has something like 260 apartments whilst the Eastside scheme has something like 1,500. These will be all high rise whilst Eastside will be all low rise. I don't really feel the two will clash. If anything I think it will bring more into the area.

Highrise living doesn't appeal to everyone which is understandable. I doubt very much Eastside will be affected by this development.
The apartments in Eastside will still sell just look at the location and the setting with the lake and resturants on your doorstep.
I wouldn't be suprised if Eastside doesn't turn out to be one of the prestigious developments in Notts.

Can't believe i've come back to this. This looks to be the perfect tower in the perfect place. Fingers crossed.

Its a brilliant tower, but I really must question the location. Admitedly I don't know Nottingham and all I'm going by is that one rough skyline mock-up from the south, but it just looks incredibly 'on its own'!

From that angle it does look relatively "alone" but from other main routes into the city the other 21 storey tower will be clearly visible aswell as the 19 storey Eastside Tower.
Walking around that area in the future will be fantastic as it'll be an incredibly dense cluster of buildings of high architectural quality with the taller tower as a pinnacle.
Lets just hope that this isn't the last of the highrise proposals for Nottingham.

Lets just hope that this isn't the last of the highrise proposals for Nottingham.

I think if this one gets through planning we will be seeing a lot more highrise proposals.lets just hope the powers that be, see this as a good oppotunity.

Its a brilliant tower, but I really must question the location. Admitedly I don't know Nottingham and all I'm going by is that one rough skyline mock-up from the south, but it just looks incredibly 'on its own'!

That, though, would be an argument for never having built any tall tower anywhere ever. Someone has to be the first one!

^^

Exactly.

Something has got to be the first tall building in Nottingham. Why not this.

I really hope the council dont reduce it in height. Would be a real shame.

As someone else has said on here, it would be great if they let it pass without too many issues as it might increase others to put in applications also. You never know.

Interesting news in NEP today about BioCity wanting £10million of building in the Eastside Development. Great for Eastside. First bit of public company interest.

Biocity is planning a £10m expansion.

The bio science park in Nottingham is looking at building on Eastside, the 36-acre site between London Road and Sneinton.

BioCity says its first purpose-built development, which would accommodate 400 people, is a response to growing demand for space from its expanding companies.

It has ordered a feasibility study in to the scheme, which is three to four years from fruition.

Manchester architects Fairhursts are drawing up plans for a 100,000 sq ft development.

Work could start in two years on the BioCity building, which would be one of the first at Eastside.

BioCity chief executive Glenn Crocker said the building would also attract potential inward investors to Nottingham.

Funding for the project has yet to be raised.

Fairhursts have worked on similar schemes in Manchester.

Dr Crocker said: "They are carrying out a feasibility study on taking a plot within Eastside, looking at how that can be developed for further growth space for bio science companies.

"The building is expected to cost £10m-plus.

"We will have the architects' feasibility study before Easter.

"We have to raise the money - it will not be grant-funded and it has to work financially.

"The project is in collaboration with Eastside City, the developers of the Eastside site, Nottingham Development Enterprise (NDE) and Nottingham Regeneration Ltd.

"We are working broadly within one of the designs of Eastside City but whether it has a 'wow factor' will depend on the economics."

Dr Crocker added: "We are looking at a mixture of office-based science businesses and laboratory businesses.

"It will substantially grow the reputation we have for bio-science businesses.

"We are building on our existing platform."

BioCity, based in Pennyfoot Street, Sneinton, was created out of the former BASF research laboratories originally created by Boots.

BASF gave the labs to Nottingham Trent University to create BioCity jointly with the University of Nottingham.

It has grown into a home for 50 businesses employing 350 people.

Neil Horsley, chief executive of NDE, said it had "fronted" the feasibility study with cash aid from the Greater Nottingham Partnership.

He said: "We went out to tender from architects.

"This could help give a boost to Nottingham Eastside.

"This is important to Nottingham's Science City reputation."

It sounds very interesting. My views...

This makes the possibility of them moving into this tower highly unlikely. However... if they are moving into it then the Bio-City must be planning some super extention.

Secondly, how are the Bio-City going to develop on land which has already been given full planning consent, already owned by eastside etc??? I thought the natural route would have been to development the site and probably pre-sign the bio-city up to one of the buildings. The fact that it is instead the Bio-City who are putting these plans forward leads me to believe there are some problems with this Eastside Stuff.

Lastly... I would love for the Bio-City to have an iconic stand out building that would help to promote it around europe. But how do you build a £100,000 iconic building for only £10m?

how do you build a £100,000 iconic building for only £10m?

I will be happy to build you a £100,000 building for £10m. In fact, seeing as it's you, let's say £5m.

:lol: :lol: Woops... you know what I meant!!

It sounds very interesting. My views...

This makes the possibility of them moving into this tower highly unlikely. However... if they are moving into it then the Bio-City must be planning some super extention.

Yes there cant have been any agreement between Chek Whyte and Bio-City. But CW is clearly trying to attract them to his scheme....the second tower hadnt been mentioned before but provides the exact amount of floorspace Bio City require. Also Fairhursts are only carrying out "feasibility studies" on the Eastside site so it doesnt look like the plans have got very far.

Secondly, how are the Bio-City going to develop on land which has already been given full planning consent, already owned by eastside etc??? I thought the natural route would have been to development the site and probably pre-sign the bio-city up to one of the buildings. The fact that it is instead the Bio-City who are putting these plans forward leads me to believe there are some problems with this Eastside Stuff.

It doesnt have full planning consent - only outline and the detailed plans for individual buildings have yet to be submitted and approved. I doubt any detailed plans have been prepared for the Bio City side of the site yet as I dont think that will be part of Phase 1.


Lastly... I would love for the Bio-City to have an iconic stand out building that would help to promote it around europe. But how do you build a £100,000 iconic building for only £10m?

They couldnt....but then the Evening Post rarely checks its facts

Its a brilliant tower, but I really must question the location. Admitedly I don't know Nottingham and all I'm going by is that one rough skyline mock-up from the south, but it just looks incredibly 'on its own'!

I agree, I love the Towers but even from the model it looks way out of place?

What you have to remember is Nottingham is not flat like on the renders ,theres quite a few hills and cliffs,plus its right next to the east side development which will be quite dense.I do agree that it will stand out quite a bit but i dont think it will be as bad as what you think.

agreed

thanks I suppose models don't often paint the picture. I don't recognise that part of the city centre which doesn't help and I know Nottingham quite well. I can't envisage it, unlike the proposed Westbridge Towers, which in terms location are spot on.

You would never really go down there.

Its the other side of the ice stadium.

thats not a great part of the city is it, so in that respect will act as a catalyst for regeneration?

Could do although Eastside is right next door. Hopefully new proposals we be planned for further up the road towards the ice stadium.

I agree, I really want to see that bus depot disappear from down there, we could see a really high-quality development on that junction instread.

What do we think speculating that we will see in the tower? I think hotel wise we could be looking at a Hyatt or a Radisson. They tend to take quite high profile spots in cities. This is a perfect place for a hotel, with the offices, Ice Arena and increasing levels of residential as well...they'll make a fortune!

I think the Ice Arena is one of the blandest developments in the city. I hate it.

Most of it looks rubbish, especially the curved bit facing Cranbrook House. The big glass atrium looks quite good though.

I like the Ice arena, I think most cities in the UK would kill to have that development

I agree, I quite like it, there's very little you can do with arenas to make them look that interesting really. The NEC and the MEN are both pretty bland as well. its as interesting as it was ever going to be. It needs development around it to focus the eye elsewhere, like decent sized towers, some nice hotels near it, plus offices in that area would work well, and get rid of that kind of 'working class' feel that the market area has. (i dont mean that to sound as snobby as it did!)

Theres loads you could do to make it decent! look at this arena in croydon...

http://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/en/0/05/Arena_home.jpg

A little glass and a little interactivity does the job. The majority of our arena is full of bland faceless sandstone walls and that blue cladding looks so dated already. Its loosing its colour and all sorts. I think its terrible.

not sure what u mean there pharmj - do you just mean clean the area up a bit? i think that area of town should become an extension of hockley, rather than a place for expensive commercial developments. hockley is a great little area, but very small, and i think nottingham could easily support a larger "independant retail", creative and cultural area.

Hockley is such a good area and mis used to an extent in my opinion. Sadly there are so many small niche shops that go out of business as the rent there is probably sky high.

In summer i would love to here music piped throughout the main st. Nothing too loud, just some local music or something.

The Ice Arena could have been better but thats what we have so it is a case of "there you are".

The new builds (or potential new builds) around the arena could really add a major element to the arena.

If the bus depot goes with Eastside and the Market gets imrpoved. Along with Science City and Cheks Tower that side of the arena could be immense.

Also, the other side NEEDS someone to take the bar/restaurant unit over under the ice house. That would make a huge difference to the area in my opinion. And lets not forget the Bildurn site and the flats being built across the road.

Hopefully they wont f it all up.

Lower parliment street is back up again on chek whytes website. he has replaced the biocity signature on the small tower and replaced it with whytes tower,so i guess biocity wont be interested in the new tower after all.

Hopefully this is a sign that its close to being formaly proposed.

How do you guys think this area should link up (bus depot) with the sneinton market area?

I think offices would work better inbetween Eastside and Sneinton Market. The buildings should be set back from the road slightly to create a large pavement/entrance way to each building.
I think a few tall buildings (similar height to the Telephone Exchange) but obviously not as stumpy could really work well here. It'd give a big city impression as you drive down there.
I'd like to see some good quality low/mid rise buildings along there aswell.
Further up directly over from the Ice Arena I'd like to see the long building that curves around the corner demolished and left as an open space with some retail and resturants. When a concert is on the atmosphere around there would be really good.
The row of buildings with the Stadium Kebab Shop or whatever it's called (the ones that are mostly boarded up) should just be demolished allowing easier access to the area around the market.

The Post have finally caught up...

NOTTINGHAM'S £120M SKYSCRAPER PLAN

09:00 - 28 February 2008

Plans have been unveiled for Nottingham's first skyscraper.

Businessman Chek Whyte, 42, who starred in Channel 4 series The Secret Millionaire, wants to build two towers - one 50 storeys high and the other 21.

The £120m, 600ft development would be built in the Eastside regeneration zone.

600ft is just under 183 metres.

The Post have finally caught up...



600ft is just under 183 metres.

Just about to post the same thing. Unfortunately, I cannot see it happening, not at 600ft anyway. Local government will make sure that it will just end up being another mid-rise building instead of the iconic one that was intended.

^^ Welcome Patrick

Suprisingly the Post has given it a cautious welcome....

POST COMMENT: LANDMARK, AND NO BLAND-MARK

09:00 - 28 February 2008

There has been much grumbling around the city about the quality of the buildings going up - eyesores are coming down only to be replaced with bland, formula designs.

So it's intriguing to see plans for a glass-built skyscraper in an area of the city that has little to boast about architecturally.

Such a design will attract criticism but, on paper at least, it looks exciting and has the potential to become a landmark on the eastern edge of the city.

The city needs adventurous, ambitious planning if it wants to grow as a centre for commerce and entertainment.

There may be complaints about the tower blocking views across the urban area, but at least it would draw the eye from the incinerator.

It certainly looks more glamorous than the brick and concrete blocks going up elsewhere.

183m? Only 5m shorter than Manc's Piccadilly Tower! Monster.

This will be the Midlands' tallest by a long way. (Not including VTP of course)

^^ Welcome Patrick

Suprisingly the Post has given it a cautious welcome....

Thanks, I have been hovering for a while but decided to finally start posting.

The post was very slow on the uptake and like you say, totally sitting on the fence as per usual.

Cheks probably gone to them for some publicity. If he gets the city behind it surely the council will find it harder to say no.

Nottingham's first skyscraper could be the key to bringing investment in the city, according to the businessman with a towering ambition to build it.

Property developer Chek Whyte has revealed £120m plans for a 600ft development, including hotel, office and residential space.

It would stand at almost twice the height of Big Ben, about two thirds the size of the Eiffel Tower, 45% as big as the Empire State Building and more than three times the height of the Aspire sculpture planned for the University of Nottingham.

Mr Whyte, 42, who last year starred in the Channel 4 series The Secret Millionaire, wants to build two towers next to each other - one 50 storeys high and the other 21 storeys - within the Eastside regeneration zone.

It would house a 200-bedroom four or five star hotel, offices and 258 new apartments.

And it would have a 1,000-seat conference centre in the base and 140 parking spaces in four basement floors.

The site is in Lower Parliament Street, between the junctions with Pennyfoot Street and Poplar Street, next to the BioCity complex.

Ian Simpson Architects, who are renowned for towering mixed-use developments in Manchester and Birmingham, are working alongside Chek Whyte Industries company Cityrev on the project, known as Whyte Towers.

Mr Whyte described it as an "iconic, net zero carbon landmark building".

He said: "This could be the start of the Eastside regeneration zone. It is between the city and Eastside, so it links the two.

"It would be an iconic building, and a building that sets a precedent for quality and sustainability going forward.

"We seem to have put up a lot of boxes in this city, some of which are, frankly, eyesores.

"If it wants to bring inward investment in then Nottingham has got to start doing things like this.

"At the moment, the outside world looks at Nottingham and asks why it would invest there. If we want to bring in their money then we have got to show we are serious.

"The money will be in place for the start of the scheme. We have got five hotel operators looking at taking sections of it if it goes ahead."

It will be a pre-let scheme, with a funding package involving banks and investors once the lets are in place.

The Evening Post revealed in May last year how Mr Whyte was in the early stages of drawing up plans for what he hoped could be the tallest building in the city. At that time it was thought the development would be up to 40-storeys tall.

Now the initial plans are complete and this is the first time the details have been revealed.

The project has yet to be formally proposed to the city counci and Mr Whyte said the planning process would take up to nine months.

"At the moment, this is a concept - the rest will come out of discussions," he said.

"We really hope the council come on board and support us. This would be something good that we want to do for Nottingham."

Mr Whyte, the son of a lorry driver, is one of the richest men in England and a successful property developer.

Hilary Silvester, chairman of the Nottingham Civic Society, said she was "gobsmacked" by the proposals.

"I just think it is too tall for the site and too tall for the Nottingham skyline," she said.

"It would be out of scale. It would probably dominate the skyline at the expense of more important buildings.

"And I would question its viability in the light of the amount of development that is going on that has not been sold."

Cheks probably gone to them for some publicity. If he gets the city behind it surely the council will find it harder to say no.

"Civic Society Woman Says It's Too Tall - Shock!"

That is the evening post's headline for tomorrow.

I bet she is about 104 and would happily knock it down to about 3 storeys if she had her way.

183m is huge! I worked near this building below which is similar size and I can tell you its huge!

http://img84.imageshack.us/img84/8647/bdgao7.png (http://imageshack.us)

Why do the post always get a statement from a 70 year old dorris... Look at whats happened in Manchester since the Beetham tower....

There are 17 people viewing this thread...at least the Evening Post have generated some interest for us!

Now 25 guests....and me lol. Sign up, sign up, its all free!

I think we should start the discussion we had a few days ago. I'd love to see everyone else opinions on the tower lol.

IMO, this is a perfect place for a tower. No obvious sight lines will be blocked, its away from the historical core, and it will build a lot of interest in the city.

And for everyone that read it in the post today! New Nottingham had the exclusive months ago!

Evening post story tomorrow

"councillor fears new tower will create wall and cut off Sneinton" :blahblah::blahblah::blahblah:

I've just read some of the comments on the Evening Post website. It's so fustrating seeing people comparing this building to Victoria Flats.
The comment by Berry wh obviously didn't read the article and said the money should be invested in Victoria Leisure Centre instead :lol: Fucking idiot.

the moron thinks the council is paying for it!

I think they should get rid of that comments section its full of moaning half wits. I used to read the comments all the time last year until I got fed up of reading that BJ Manns comments - what a bore he is!

^^ I think the comments are suprisingly positive. Someone if wrote that they thought it was a conspiracy!

^^ I think some people are starting realise that this will be a huge assett for the city.
There's just a select few that don't believe in the scheme and nothing will change their opinion.
They need to realise that this won't be a modern day 60's housing block.

Also the post quoted it as being 600ft tall when it isn't. Is this just lazy research on their behalf or is there something they know that we don't?
600ft is the same height as T42 in London!

Well we dont know the exact height yet. The 150 m comes from Gothicform's estimation I think. The Evening Post have presumably spoken directly with Chek Whyte. Of course the 600ft could be some generous rounding up for impact (and this probably also includes the facade over run where as, if Ive got it right, the 150 doesnt).

Well we dont know the exact height yet. The 150 m comes from Gothicform's estimation I think. The Evening Post have presumably spoken directly with Chek Whyte. Of course the 600ft could be some generous rounding up for impact (and this probably also includes the facade over run where as, if Ive got it right, the 150 doesnt).

I worked out the exact sizes by printing out the scaled drawings:

146m - For the larger one (not including the crown)
78m - For the smaller one.

There is probably a 2 meters or so possible inaccuracies.

I think we should start the discussion we had a few days ago. I'd love to see everyone else opinions on the tower lol.

IMO, this is a perfect place for a tower. No obvious sight lines will be blocked, its away from the historical core, and it will build a lot of interest in the city.

And for everyone that read it in the post today! New Nottingham had the exclusive months ago!

I did read it on here first myself, around January time when I found the New Nottm site (which is excellent).

I work very close to the proposed site and spent a lot of time wondering what they were going to do with it, so I was very pleasantly surprised when I saw the piece on NN. As you say the location is spot on and with the development of the eastside (if it ever happens!) would not dominate the skyline so much.

In Paris (and london to a certain extent) they have built all of the highrise and modern structures on one side of the city as not to interfere with the tourist and sightseeing areas and it works perfectly for me. That part of town is a bloody eye sore and I hate having to walk past that eastside wasteland everyday - its depressing.

It would not surprise me if there were complaints about it blocking out views of the city (even though it does not) but that will always happen. Its a shame they were not quite so worried when they built that awful college on Maid Marian Way or Sneinton flats (blocking the castle and windmill respectively).

The main stumbling block will be the local authorities of course and I have a terrible feeling we may still be talking about this in 5 years time (by which stage the council will have it reduced to a 10 storey hotel).

146m is 479' which is way off 600', if they was rounding up then it would be to 500' at most

Have I done something awefully wrong?

I did check with the gothman? we both agreed I was just about right?

Maybe the post has done something wrong! Although if they're reporting this as a 600' tower when its actually a 480' its very irresponsible of them

146m - For the larger one (not including the crown)
78m - For the smaller one.

yeah looking at the plans we got these were accurate to a metre or two. my guess is the 600 figure will come from PRs because its a "nice" figure. i hear it all the time where people give you grossly inaccurate heights. now either theyve done that or the tower has been revised since we saw it which sounds unlikely given the number of floors is the same. 183m for a 50 floor residential tower is an extreme height.

lumiere is 54 floors and 171m, king edward is 54 floors and 170m, piccadilly tower is 58 floors and 188m, pan peninsula is 48 floors and 147m and so on. here's a list of residential towers in the uk under construction, propsoed or approved with more than 47 floors. st george wharf is only so tall because of the very very substantial crown it has.
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/searchresults.php?nameAddress=&postcode=&council=&county=&region=&country=&status=Approved%3BProposed%3BUnder+Construction&buildinguse=Residential&completiondate=&heritagestatus=&roofheight=&spireheight=&eitherHeight=&floors=%3E47&landcost=&constructioncost=&lastsalesvalue=&companies=

awesome news! if its got to the evening post thats a great sign. maybe we should have a check whyte tower theme tune?

here's my suggestion:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=cGE5jxWdupQ

The height difference is probably because the Post have included the crown and rounded it up to the 600. It might also be that the height has been pushed up slightly by the inclusion of an auditorium (1000 seat is pretty big) for the conference centre at the base.

How do you scale plans printed off the web though Dan? I nearly always find that they are badly distorted.

The height difference is probably because the Post have included the crown and rounded it up to the 600. It might also be that the height has been pushed up slightly by the inclusion of an auditorium (1000 seat is pretty big) for the conference centre at the base.

How do you scale plans printed off the web though Dan? I nearly always find that they are badly distorted.

you dont need to print plans off to scale off them, use the measure in photoshop :)

the height difference will be because the post has clearly reguritated whatever the PR told them. with tall buildings people should never ever believe anything but the specialist press with accurate figures

I can believe they would exagerate by 20 feet but surely not 120 feet

simply fantastic news. To be honest you are always going to get people fussing about these projects (the one that annoyed me was somone living in Kirkby...nowhere near nottingham!)

I am pleased the Chek Whyte seems to recognise that you need the people behind you to get the council behind you and hence the project off the ground. This simply MUST happen...as its started to get national attention (via here, NewNottingham and Skyscraper news etc). Its only a matter of time before its on the BBC's radar, and if it then gets dropped, the damage to Nottingham's reputation would be enormous.

Ive looked on the EP website at the coments being sent in and the majority of them seem quite positive to the idea which is always a good thing.

I can believe they would exagerate by 20 feet but surely not 120 feet

i can. the london evening standard took one press reelase about a hospital which has two towers of approximately 100m each and did a story on how london was getting a 200m tall hospital, the tallest in the world. by the way, skyscrapernews has a higher readership than the nottingham evening post :)

Just had a read of the comments section from the Evening Post article about Chek Whyte's tower and the comments at the moment seemed to have turned quite negative (unfortunately!) ... as usual there seems to be a lot of narrow-minded people out there who absolutely hate change! or highrises! :)

Anyway ... sod the lot of them! they're probably "career-complainers" anyway!

I think the Evening Post has at least generated a lot of interest in the scheme and I am all in favour of the development ... it will bring in more outside investment into the city and hopefully may even spur on the Eastside development if enough speculation gathers. Read somewhere yesterday that the Waterfront plaza development (Jury's Inn) is already making money for the investment there .. considering the short time is has been around, it goes to show that there is the demand out there for such developments.

I don't see why there would be massive opposition to the scheme as that area for Chek Whyte's tower is fairly run down and really needs a massive make-over, which can't really be a bad thing! The tower doesn't really obscure the lines of sight for most of the more historic buildings in the city, as it's further away (sort of!) from the city's core commericial areas ... and hopefully that will extinguish the anti-high rise crowd! but I fear that it will get boged down by red-tape and challenges from the anti-highrise crowd (who; let's face it .. are probably the ones which classed the BBC building as a high rise!) and may take a lot longer to go through before approval... we all know how long public enquiries slow things down! we may have our own Terminal 5 enquiry! .... :)

I love emma's comments seems pretty forward thinking and see the big picture.... she needs to join the forum like Patrick.... welcome .... read your comment and realised you had been reading the comments here.....

after seeing a number of positive comments on the EP site i am more hopeful that this will go ahead.....

so many good things could come from this development... 5 star hotel, conference centre and kick start the island site.... great..... i want this pushed through quickly .......

I love chek quotes too posted by danz..... you can tell he means business he has covered a number of stumbling blocks....

the civic woman sounds worried too and i thought her key word was "probably".. her mind is programed to fear height

also did you notice that the EP have a different render with no crown?? or is this just the angle??

I think you will find it was just the angle of the render

I've just read a comment on the EP site by a woman saying it should be built to be earthquake proof :lol:

Some skyscrapers have a viewing platform on the top floor.I would really like to see something like this in cheks tower or maybe a restaurant which would be open to the general public.

The views from up there would be fantastic.

i agree wholeheartedly, would be amazing.

^^ I think its quite likely Mr Whyte might be planning on having his own penthouse with private atrium at the top of the tower.

It would be a shame if he did , but to be honest who can blame him,i think i would do the same if i was in his position.

Read a post on that left lion site from today that basically said the council have told them (the developers) that there is no chance of this happening?

i should be jumping be for joy at this news, coming from leicester and all, but im not. this is a great building and the planners and who ever in nottingham should be bending over backwards to make this happen. the simpson towers in leicetser where originally a lot taller, but the council made them knock a few floors off, the fuckers. ur council will probaly do the same, i cant see em turning the whole thing away, that wud be fucking stupid. u got to make sure this development happens, even if it ends up a bit shorter than the original plan

Yeah Ive thought for a while that it will get reduced but knowing Nottingham city council it will probably get reduced to about half its height.

Maybe that was part of the plan and the developers went in with 50 storeys just to shock the council, knowing it would have no chance in the hope that it would get reduced to lets say 40 storeys

Do you know what the original floor count (and approx height) was Braunstone Geezer?

There have been several reductions in floor count in subsequent press reports on the first two towers :mad:


BG

Its looks like Chek is so busy in france he forgot to pay his website hosting bill lol...

chekwhyteindustries.co.uk/

:lol: Not very professional!

:D I forgot to pay the bill for my domain names a couple of years ago .. shit happens .. services were cut off for a few days, a bit inconvenient but not the disaster it could be for someone running a prestigious property development empire :D:D:D how embarrassing :D
:bash::banana:



BG

From this week's EGI.

http://img.photobucket.com/albums/v397/jrb041067/Picture183.jpg

I think I'm being daft but I'm struggling to picture where this development is - can anyone help? Sounds like a fantastic project for Nottm though!

It's at the disused petrol station next to Bio City. Over the road from Machine Mart.
The petrol station is currently a valeting place.
On the corner before you reach the BBC headquarters.
Know where I mean?

Check this out :D...



The developer and builder paid less than £500,000 for the order book of the 197-year-old business which collapsed on Monday after a row over an unpaid bill.

Mr Whyte, who lives at Stamford Hall on the Notts-Leics border, said he planned to re-engage at least 60 staff and continue trading as Thomas Fish.

Staff were being summoned to a meeting today with a view to resuming work on Monday.

Mr Whyte has also taken an assignment of the lease of the Thomas Fish premises in Little Tennis Street, Colwick, from the Thomas Fish pension fund.

The sale excludes the small works division with five employees which has been bought by Mark Thomas who worked for Fish.

It will continue for the time being from Little Tennis Street.

Mr Whyte concluded the deal with Thomas Fish administrator and Mazars partner Philip Lyon yesterday afternoon.

Mr Whyte beat off competition from Rok, the parent company of Nottingham-based SOL Construction, and Hispec Civil of Birmingham.

Mr Whyte, who is proposing to build a 50-storey development in Lower Parliament Street, said: "Thomas Fish has a fantastic name and has the quality I aspire to.

"I am building bigger and better projects in Nottingham and they have the construction expertise I have never had."

Mr Whyte said he hoped to continue supplying labour for the construction of South Reef, a speculative development of offices, apartments and leisure in Canal Street. The scheme is owned by former Thomas Fish director Charles Fish, although it has nothing to do with the construction group.

Mr Whyte added: "I am definitely retaining the name of Thomas Fish. It is a very strong brand.

"All sub-contractors will be retained. We have a meeting with them today at Little Tennis Street."

Yeh I know where it is now, thanks Stefan.

Also, good news for Thomas Fish and their developments!

This is good news for Nottingham :)
If all goes to plan with the Chek Whyte tower (fingers crossed) Thomas Fish will be the main contractor for the project aswell (I would imagine)

This is excellent news. It looks as though Chek Whyte is equipping himself with all the expertise he will need to get this project off the ground. Tell you what, driving down that way, I would get rid of 75% of all the buildings either side of the road where this is proposed. I hope this really spurs that side of town into action. Over the road from it is an awful looking pub and mechanics. I dnt want these people to go out of business, but the area is and looks so deprived, despite the ice centre and being so close to town.

Thats my one criticism of the ice arena, it has done nothing for the immeidiate area, and is really quite disconnected from it. It could have been used to generate so much more development nearby than it actually was.

Whats the deal with this one then anyone know when (if at all) it will be submitted to the planning department?

The Ice Arena (whilst it brings loads of investment) really does act like a barrier to the rest of the city centre.
That Machine Mart or whatever it's called is horrendous I agree with PharmJ. I hope it goes if the tower is built. It'd be a huge shame having such a prestigious development and then having a shop that sells power tools and cement mixers directly opposite.

I think if the tower is built,that area will get alot of regeneration very quickly,as i think alot of businesses will want to be next door to such a project.

Let's hope so. This would be one of the most exclusive projects in Notts if it went ahead.

'Chek' this...

Millionaire businessman Chek Whyte will finally be confirmed as the new owner of Ilkeston Town today.

The Ilkeston-based property developer has been in talks to take control at the New Manor Ground following the death of chairman and long-time benefactor Paul Millership in November.

The Robins only narrowly avoided relegation from the UniBond Premier Division and takeover negotiations have dragged on into the close season.

Rumours have been rife about current manager Nigel Jemson's position, with the club having to go on record to deny that he had been relieved of his duties.

However, Whyte is believed to be lining up his own man to replace Jemson at the helm.

Whyte's plans to take over at Ilkeston were first revealed in the Telegraph back in February and he finally confirmed his interest yesterday.

Meanwhile, club secretary Keith Burnand stated this morning that a deal would be signed today.

And Town director David Morgan said last night: "At the moment, Nigel Jemson is still the manager but the new people may have their own thoughts."

Jemson, 38, was appointed manager of Ilkeston in October 2005 after a spell as caretaker boss, succeeding Phil Stant.

But the former Nottingham Forest striker's tenure has been in doubt for some time, particularly after a disappointing 2007-08 campaign, in which the team only stayed up by virtue of goal difference.

One name in the frame is former director of youth development at troubled Scottish Premier League club Gretna, David Holdsworth.

The 39-year-old finished his playing career with Gretna after spells with a string of English clubs including Watford, Sheffield United and Birmingham City.

Holdsworth, the twin brother of former Derby County assistant boss Dean Holdsworth, went on to manage the reserve team at Raydale Park, leading them to the league title.

He was subsequently appointed director of youth development in May 2006 but was sacked only five months later by the debt-ridden club - currently facing extinction - as part of a cost-cutting exercise.

Whyte, meanwhile, has admitted he is not a "football man" and does not plan to interfere in on-the-field matters.

His other business interests will no doubt keep him busy enough as it is.

He runs Chek Whyte Industries, which specialises in construction, development and restoration.

He recently took over building firm Thomas Fish and Son after the company went into administration.

Whyte is also planning to build a 50-storey skyscraper in the centre of Nottingham.

Last November, he appeared on the Channel Four programme, The Secret Millionaire, in which he went undercover in Salford for 10 days before donating cash to the most worthy causes.

He spent time in a homeless shelter and a youth club and has since secured a deal to renovate two tower blocks in the Salford area as part of the regeneration of the area.

Lol.. this is pretty funny too lol..

http://eveningpostrichardbaker.blogspot.com/2008/04/fall-of-fish-and-rise-of-whyte.html

It sounds to me like the guy you are relying on to build the tallest tower in the east midlands is a right dodgy character

It sounds to me like the guy you are relying on to build the tallest tower in the east midlands is a right dodgy character

Well they do say that you cannot make an omlette without breaking some eggs? Many successful business men have that side to their nature, its just a fact of life.

Yeah but this guy doesn't even seem to be able to pay his bills, even the criminally sane know that eventually if you don't pay people 'off' sic no one will work with you. He does not sound like a credible developer for a project of this scale. Perhaps he is and the the negative comments are just from his creditors :lol:

So still no real news on this tower then, I wonder when it will be formally proposed? Assuming it hasnt be dropped completely

^^ He's actually carried out quite a few large projects in and around Nottingham - including taking several problem properties off the Council which they've been grateful for.

He cant be that dodgy - he definetly has a philathropic side with the secret millionaire thing and now Ilkeston Town F.C. Plus he recently acquired his own firm of builders so they can hardly refuse to work with him.

Lol.. Chek is definately a dodgy character.. aside from the stuff we know about he's also previously been banned from directorship for some reason or another lol...

I was talking with someone who has been dealing with Thomas Fish on Southreef. They told me if they have to any dealings with Chek... they'll be asking for cash up front lol!

Ahem - if it was me I wouldn't be posting on a public forum about the "dodginess" or otherwise of reputable millionaire businessmen.

To be honest he seems like a normal sort of guy to me. Its good to see someone coming from a working class background doing well for themselves. Hes probably very streetwise which might come across as dodgy to some people

This view will be so much better with the 50 and 21 storey towers in view as well as the tower at eastide, also wasnt there a document a while back that identified 4 spots in this area for towers up to around 70m? We could have a nice little cluster going on in a few years, well if any of them actually get past the drawing board, with this council :ohno:

http://farm4.static.flickr.com/3154/2511916848_6ca4dfa785_b.jpg

We have the midrises already all we need now are a few taller buildings and that side of town will have a really big city feel.

We have the midrises already all we need now are a few taller buildings and that side of town will have a really big city feel.

I can't see the tower getting permission at its proposed height (more is the pity) but would be happy with any structure thats bigger than Viccy flats - if only to take its crown as being the tallest building in the city.

Thats a great photo. We definately need more high rises down there.

^^ cheers, now we need someone with good photoshopping skills to put in the 50 storey tower!