City Pride | Canary Wharf | 239m | 75 fl | Proposed - Page 35

aphw · January 20th, 2013, 03:45 PM

About 233m apparently.

Core Rising · January 20th, 2013, 04:23 PM

Cheers, hopefully a mod could amend the thread title to avoid confusion.

I am he · January 20th, 2013, 07:33 PM

Divys on bbc news got me excited with 293m! must be a mistake, although it did say 960ft in brackets after, muppits.

***ill tonkso*** · January 21st, 2013, 09:27 PM

It won't be that tall, City Airport has left this area with a 'glass ceiling'.

RugBurn · January 22nd, 2013, 04:28 AM

the BBC article still hasn't corrected the article ( i sent an email 2 days ago ) but this is an exciting project that will look great and hopefully give CW a boost

Core Rising · January 22nd, 2013, 09:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by ill tonkso

It won't be that tall, City Airport has left this area with a 'glass ceiling'.

Thread title needs changing to 233m

SkyscraperSuperman · January 22nd, 2013, 02:07 PM

According to gegloma01 (post #578) it's 1 metre taller than One Canada Square, which would make it 236m AGL.

gegloma01 · January 22nd, 2013, 03:19 PM

No, actually it is 233m.

Cat man do · January 22nd, 2013, 06:39 PM

How well occupied are the other Landmark towers, is there demand for these flats?

gegloma01 · January 22nd, 2013, 07:32 PM

No idea about the occupancy rate.
Prices are not exaggerated given it is in London, and in the centre of one of the main European business district. Example: Level 43, 151 sq.m is to buy for £ 1,550,000.

Maxakoff · February 4th, 2013, 04:35 PM

Some bad news for this one:

http://www.wharf.co.uk/2013/02/rough...or-city-p.html

But some good news for the new skyscraper in WW:

http://www.wharf.co.uk/2013/02/starc...or-wood-w.html

Bottlefall · February 4th, 2013, 05:09 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maxakoff

But some good news for the new skyscraper in WW:

Don't see any good news. Looks like these buffoons in TH will reject anything that is an actual skyscraper in a skyscraper area.

i_like_concrete · February 4th, 2013, 05:26 PM

Well, if they're quoting the London Plan in their opposition, then there is actually method in their madness, and regardless of how it should be interpreted, this is clearly a problem that goes beyond Tower Hamlets, and involves the city wide government, which indicates that if there ever was a reason for the Mayor to get involved and demonstrate exactly what the approach should be towards this sort of density, now would be it.

Julian141 · February 4th, 2013, 05:46 PM

Don't know how there can be such an opposition to density considering the lacking in housing at the mo.

Maxakoff · February 4th, 2013, 06:06 PM

I know, guys, I have to contain myself not to have a rant. I really think that CP, Arrowhead, Cuba, Skylines and so on could transform CW into something really really special - instead we witnessing these endless wrangelings over the height and size of the proposals. I mean it is 21st cent, guys at TH, hello?!

Dreamer · February 4th, 2013, 07:51 PM

Surely Boris can step in and put them all through?

Cat man do · February 4th, 2013, 09:40 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Dreamer

Surely Boris can step in and put them all through?

It's Boris, not Ken?

chchdesign · February 5th, 2013, 05:02 AM

Hi everyone, I just thought I'd pop in and let you all know about a thread in SSC's The Barracks re the Falkland Islands issue with Argentina. If any of you would like to join the discussion and possibly vote in the poll which is asking if you agree that the Falklands should have the right of self determination or should they be handed to Argentina, then that would be great.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...56817&page=285

Black Cat · February 5th, 2013, 03:09 PM

This residential tower will not be overshadowing a residential area, so this rationale to reduce the tower height would not stand up at this particular site.

gegloma01 · February 5th, 2013, 03:43 PM

at worst, it will be reduced by 17m, as the 216m version has already been approved.

January 20th, 2013, 07:33 PM	#683
I am he Registered User Join Date: Oct 2011 Location: London of course Posts: 221 Likes (Received): 0	Divys on bbc news got me excited with 293m! must be a mistake, although it did say 960ft in brackets after, muppits. __________________ You'll never walk alone

January 21st, 2013, 09:27 PM	#684
*ill tonkso* Portsmouths Finest, Maybe Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 14,077 Likes (Received): 238	It won't be that tall, City Airport has left this area with a 'glass ceiling'. __________________ Official Skyscrapercity 'Support the Shard at London Bridge' Facebook Group! Ill-Tonkso.co.uk - My Portfolio Website

January 22nd, 2013, 02:07 PM	#687
SkyscraperSuperman Hi. Join Date: Nov 2008 Location: Portsmouth, UK [] Beijing, China [X] Posts: 2,374 Likes (Received): 95	According to gegloma01 (post #578) it's 1 metre taller than One Canada Square, which would make it 236m AGL. __________________ ~~~ Studying Civil Engineering at the University of Portsmouth.. ~~~ My fundraising page for my 6-day trek to Machu Picchu in August 2013, raising money for the Epilepsy Society: http://www.justgiving.com/richard-francis-peru Follow me on Twitter: https://twitter.com/ThisIsRichaaard My last.fm profile: http://www.last.fm/user/Spartan-King Flickr page 1 (ghost-of-sparta): http://www.flickr.com/people/ghost-of-sparta Flickr page 2 (Skyscraper Superman): http://www.flickr.com/people/82617920@N07

February 4th, 2013, 05:26 PM	#693
i_like_concrete cockney sparrow Join Date: Apr 2008 Location: London Posts: 3,361 Likes (Received): 68	Well, if they're quoting the London Plan in their opposition, then there is actually method in their madness, and regardless of how it should be interpreted, this is clearly a problem that goes beyond Tower Hamlets, and involves the city wide government, which indicates that if there ever was a reason for the Mayor to get involved and demonstrate exactly what the approach should be towards this sort of density, now would be it. __________________ Mother earth couldn't give a shit about your iphone or social networking strategy Flickr Pinterest

February 4th, 2013, 07:51 PM	#696
Dreamer Let the Jam decide Join Date: Oct 2003 Location: LIVERPOOL! Posts: 1,409 Likes (Received): 26	Surely Boris can step in and put them all through? __________________ Liber8

January 20th, 2013, 03:45 PM	#681
aphw Registered User Join Date: Dec 2010 Posts: 117 Likes (Received): 1	About 233m apparently.

January 20th, 2013, 04:23 PM	#682
Core Rising Ampersands & What Join Date: Jan 2011 Location: London/ Nottingham Posts: 4,796	Cheers, hopefully a mod could amend the thread title to avoid confusion.

January 22nd, 2013, 04:28 AM	#685
RugBurn Registered User Join Date: Feb 2006 Location: NEW YORK Posts: 167 Likes (Received): 1	the BBC article still hasn't corrected the article ( i sent an email 2 days ago ) but this is an exciting project that will look great and hopefully give CW a boost

January 22nd, 2013, 03:19 PM	#688
gegloma01 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Bruxelles Posts: 1,182 Likes (Received): 132	No, actually it is 233m.

January 22nd, 2013, 06:39 PM	#689
Cat man do Founder of the 'Gy'. Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: Carrbridge/Highlands Posts: 2,080 Likes (Received): 53	How well occupied are the other Landmark towers, is there demand for these flats?

January 22nd, 2013, 07:32 PM	#690
gegloma01 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Bruxelles Posts: 1,182 Likes (Received): 132	No idea about the occupancy rate. Prices are not exaggerated given it is in London, and in the centre of one of the main European business district. Example: Level 43, 151 sq.m is to buy for £ 1,550,000.

February 4th, 2013, 04:35 PM	#691
Maxakoff Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 67 Likes (Received): 0	Some bad news for this one: http://www.wharf.co.uk/2013/02/rough...or-city-p.html But some good news for the new skyscraper in WW: http://www.wharf.co.uk/2013/02/starc...or-wood-w.html

February 4th, 2013, 05:46 PM	#694
Julian141 Registered User Join Date: May 2008 Location: Southampton Posts: 95 Likes (Received): 23	Don't know how there can be such an opposition to density considering the lacking in housing at the mo.

February 4th, 2013, 06:06 PM	#695
Maxakoff Registered User Join Date: Oct 2012 Posts: 67 Likes (Received): 0	I know, guys, I have to contain myself not to have a rant. I really think that CP, Arrowhead, Cuba, Skylines and so on could transform CW into something really really special - instead we witnessing these endless wrangelings over the height and size of the proposals. I mean it is 21st cent, guys at TH, hello?!

February 5th, 2013, 05:02 AM	#698
chchdesign Keep it real Join Date: Nov 2009 Location: Christchurch Posts: 340 Likes (Received): 34	Hi everyone, I just thought I'd pop in and let you all know about a thread in SSC's The Barracks re the Falkland Islands issue with Argentina. If any of you would like to join the discussion and possibly vote in the poll which is asking if you agree that the Falklands should have the right of self determination or should they be handed to Argentina, then that would be great. http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...56817&page=285 __________________ "Be who you are and say what you feel, because those that mind dont matter and those who matter dont mind" - Dr Seuss

February 5th, 2013, 03:09 PM	#699
Black Cat Registered User Join Date: Oct 2002 Posts: 1,532 Likes (Received): 28	This residential tower will not be overshadowing a residential area, so this rationale to reduce the tower height would not stand up at this particular site.

February 5th, 2013, 03:43 PM	#700
gegloma01 Registered User Join Date: Jun 2009 Location: Bruxelles Posts: 1,182 Likes (Received): 132	at worst, it will be reduced by 17m, as the 216m version has already been approved.

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread: