daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > London Metro Area

London Metro Area London Calling...



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools Rate Thread
Old November 16th, 2012, 04:58 PM   #121
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,966
Likes (Received): 1961

good to see EH making good use of scarce resources
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old November 16th, 2012, 06:26 PM   #122
tsweaver
Registered User
 
tsweaver's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2011
Location: london
Posts: 262
Likes (Received): 54

surely the point about homes being uninhabitable because of the DLR is overblown? it will stop at night and can't be that loud can it, its not like they go that fast? not as bad as Elwood's apartment in blues bros surely? it would allow for the flats nearer the source of the disturbance to be cheaper, and besides, some may find it cool in a romantic urban kind way...i reckon i would, though im only used to distant underground tube rumblings where i live atm, i find the sound of trains comforting..
tsweaver no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2012, 06:34 PM   #123
london lad
Registered User
 
london lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 8,774
Likes (Received): 489

Considering there are a whole load of already built flats nearby that are as close to the dlr as this site it seems totally bizarre that TH have now used it as a reason for refusal.

To think TH actually wanted to achieve City status yet are one of the most hopeless and incompetent boroughs in London. Thank god that the original LDDC was originally in charge of planning at CW as it probably would never have been built had it been left to TH.
london lad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2012, 06:43 PM   #124
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,966
Likes (Received): 1961

London should be building for Londons needs, not boroughs building for boroughs
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2012, 07:13 PM   #125
Maxakoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 67
Likes (Received): 0

I find it bizarre that LCA is complaining - I have not seen an airplane ever flying over this area - they are flying over Wood Wharf. Perhaps I am missing something. In any event, if it is an issue than LCA should just relocate to another place imho. Enough is enough - they are flying over the two high-rise areas of London - the City and Canary Wharf, it is unacceptable that because of them real high-rises can't be built.

As to Greenwich views complaints - one of the oddest arguments I have ever heard in my life.

I personally think that Skylines would fit the area so well, certainly better than what they have there at the moment.
Maxakoff no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old November 16th, 2012, 10:38 PM   #126
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,966
Likes (Received): 1961

yep welcome to London borough level planning. Ready to fight off all that international competition!
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 17th, 2013, 01:07 PM   #127
Maxakoff
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2012
Posts: 67
Likes (Received): 0

Nice one
http://www.wharf.co.uk/2013/01/contr...s-develop.html
Maxakoff no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 24th, 2013, 11:03 PM   #128
woodgnome
CEO, Dingly Dell Corp.
 
woodgnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London
Posts: 894
Likes (Received): 397

This is up before the planning committee tonight.

http://modgov.towerhamlets.gov.uk/do...5Final%203.pdf

Once again, it has been recommended for approval by TH planning officers.

This time there are no objections from City Airport or TH environmental officers. EH are still being spoilsports, though.

Quote:
English Heritage (from application)

7.11 The proposed development is located to the south of the main cluster, approximately 1.5km from the boundary of the World Heritage Site (WHS). The proposed development by virtue of its scale and distinctive massing form a noticeable part of the wider setting, particularly in the important view from the General Wolfe statue.

Whilst the view from the General Wolfe has been subject to much change, particularly in the last twenty years, it has to date retained some sense of order with the tallest towers located at the northern end of the Isle of Dogs and some lower towers located slightly further south in developments centred around the Millennium Quarter. The clear recessive planes, the impressive Palace complex, the trees of Island Gardens, followed by low rise buildings, beyond which rise the towers are important characteristics. The visual layers of development instil a degree of visual order and importantly, the distance serves to reduce the impact of the tall buildings.

(OFFICER COMMENT: The heritage impacts of the proposal are discussed in greater detail below, within the material planning considerations section of this report. In summary, it is considered that sufficient detail has been submitted and assessed through the applicant’s Environmental Statement, to allow full consideration of the visual and heritage impacts of the proposal).
If that's the best they can do, this has to have a good chance. Fingers-crossed.
__________________
London is not a city. It is more like a country, and living in it is like living in Holland or Belgium. Its completeness makes it deceptive - there are sidewalks from one frontier to the other - and its hugeness makes it possible for everyone to invent his own city. My London is not your London, though everyone's Washington, DC is pretty much the same.
The London Embassy - Paul Theroux

Last edited by woodgnome; January 24th, 2013 at 11:23 PM.
woodgnome no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 01:26 PM   #129
woodgnome
CEO, Dingly Dell Corp.
 
woodgnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London
Posts: 894
Likes (Received): 397

Tower Hamlets rejects proposal for 50 storey tower

-- Link to Wharf article --

The proposed Skylines development at the Isle of Dogs was rejected by Tower Hamlets Council's planning committee on Thursday night. The development of two buildings, the tallest rising to 50 storeys, was queried by concerned planning committee members over a host of issues.

Ultimately they refused the application on grounds ranging from lack of play spaces for children on site to the reduction of daylight for nearby residents caused by height, to the population density of the scheme and its impact on health facilities.

The last time the application for the site in Limeharbour came to council was in November when planning officers withdrew it during the meeting following scrutiny from the committee. This time officers pushed the proposal ahead and recommended the committee approve the application. Councillors felt they had enough information to decide and voted against the plans by five to none, with two abstentions.

The proposal by ZBV (Skylines) Ltd and Skylines (Isle of Dogs) Ltd was for 764 units, of which 222 was affordable housing and, of that number, 154 was social rented.

Cllr Peter Golds, speaking on behalf of those against the development, urged the committee to reject the application on grounds of over-development in the area. "We've schools bursting at the seams, health centres with real problems seeking facilities, and transport problems," he said. "With the scale of this development there is the prospect of even more problems. It's just another ill thought-out development."

The planning officer revealed as part of the section 106 payments an extra £200,000 was offered by the developer to DLR to improve the nearby South Quay station and another £100,000 was put forward for works to Preston's Road roundabout. In total, over £6million was offered towards improving local infrastructure.

At the time of the November meeting worries had been raised by London City Airport over the height of cranes working on the development. However, for the latest meeting this was withdrawn by the airport. Tower Hamlets' own environmental health team also complained about the noise the new residents would be exposed to by DLR trains and aircraft but this was also withdrawn.

Concerns were also brought by National Grid and Thames Water over the proposals but the planning officer said he felt both groups acknowledged the issues could be ironed out. A further objection, meanwhile, came from English Heritage which complained the building would damage the view from Greenwich Park.
__________________
London is not a city. It is more like a country, and living in it is like living in Holland or Belgium. Its completeness makes it deceptive - there are sidewalks from one frontier to the other - and its hugeness makes it possible for everyone to invent his own city. My London is not your London, though everyone's Washington, DC is pretty much the same.
The London Embassy - Paul Theroux
woodgnome no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 01:48 PM   #130
Dreamer
Let the Jam decide
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: LIVERPOOL!
Posts: 1,521
Likes (Received): 67

what a joke, I thought all councils had to give permission now, on grounds that the development was overall positive and that the negative had to be really bad for it to be turned down. Triple dip - no wonder - this would of kept and created construction jobs etc, stupid twats.
__________________
Liber8
Dreamer no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 02:17 PM   #131
gravesVpelli
Registered User
 
gravesVpelli's Avatar
 
Join Date: Aug 2012
Posts: 1,206
Likes (Received): 1401

I’m assuming Tower Hamlets will also be the decision maker for the City Pride proposal, which, given their arguments (pressure on existing health facilities, schools, lack of sunlight etc etc), I cannot see gaining approval. And that is at 75 stories! It seems that the IOD is woefully inadequate to cope for much more in residential space in respect of the public facilities and infrastructure. Even the roads they built in the 80s are one-lane two-way traffic; hardly sufficient for any future increase in usage.

An enormous community of residentials such as this in an area that was never prepared for future expansion on this scale is bound to get the thumbs down. It was too ambitious.
gravesVpelli está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 03:54 PM   #132
london lad
Registered User
 
london lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 8,774
Likes (Received): 489

Basically the ever useless TH are moaning because they have not put in any plans for growth , both here (and in London generally which is adding an extra million souls in the next decade) so if they want more schools and health surgeries they should do something about it. Its not as if they haven’t seen this coming the last couple of decades.

If this has been refused for overdevelopment on the increasingly strained Isle of Dogs then surely if they are going to be consistent they will now refused every high rise scheme on the Isle of Dogs from now on, so no City Pride, Cuba St towers, Wood Wharf or the half dozen or so towers being planned for the area.
london lad no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 07:42 PM   #133
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,966
Likes (Received): 1961

seems strange, as they would be able to fund more facilities by bringing more people into the borough in such high spec and attractive housing. They would also have more clout with the TFL budget if they can show more people using public transport. No need for more roads in this area either.

I personally feel its more to do with a tedious out-of-date us and them mentality and the councillors are merely hanging onto short term votes.
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 07:44 PM   #134
JackoGunnerGoCrazy
Registered User
 
JackoGunnerGoCrazy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2013
Location: Manchester
Posts: 429
Likes (Received): 149

Any chance the London Mayor could step in on this and over turn the decision? Its been done with plenty of other developments?
__________________
"A person may cause evil to others not only by his actions but by his inaction"
JackoGunnerGoCrazy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 08:12 PM   #135
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,966
Likes (Received): 1961

could be a win win, local council gets to shrug, mayor gets to show he is building homes
potto no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 25th, 2013, 08:23 PM   #136
mulattokid
BLAND
 
mulattokid's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2005
Location: London
Posts: 8,712
Likes (Received): 259

What is amazing is the amount of council tax such developments bring into the borough....can you imagine how much for each overpriced apartment that is built?

That would pay for improving the new infrastructure needs
__________________
Quote: "Everything in life is our fault...but that's not our fault" (By a friend of Quentin Crisp)
www.jclodge.com (my singer sisters site)
The headlines read: 'another footballer is charged with sexual miscontuct'!

Is it pure coincidence that a mans ******* resembles a brain - requisite with both hemispheres, and its truncated spinal cord - always in search of sensation?
(Mark Joseph 2008)
mulattokid no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 31st, 2013, 12:28 AM   #137
menganito
Registered User
 
Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 275
Likes (Received): 13

I quite like this project. I don't understand why it has not been given permission, but I am sure it will get it. The arguments against put forward by the council are nonsense which will not hold in a judicial review.

Apart from all these things, what really surprises me, very positively, is the attitude of modern conservationist. The buildings on the site at the moment are very nice too. I mean, they are not spectacular examples of anything, but if they were from the victorian era we would have a load of demented defenders of who knows what. The author was once president of the RIBA. Being as it is an example of modern architecture we are lucky enough to not having none of that rubbish. Evidently modernism serves to impregnate the mind with the understanding that nothing is eternal except change.

Last edited by menganito; January 31st, 2013 at 12:58 AM.
menganito no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013, 08:39 PM   #138
upthecreek
Registered User
 
Join Date: Feb 2013
Posts: 103
Likes (Received): 22

This returns to the planning department next week...that was quick as it was only refused last month! The planners are recommending approval. Odd!

http://www.wharf.co.uk/2013/02/skyli...-pla.html#more
upthecreek no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013, 08:53 PM   #139
woodgnome
CEO, Dingly Dell Corp.
 
woodgnome's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2007
Location: London
Posts: 894
Likes (Received): 397

Not odd at all. Planning officers commended the two previous proposals. It's bone-headed Councillors who are the problem.
__________________
London is not a city. It is more like a country, and living in it is like living in Holland or Belgium. Its completeness makes it deceptive - there are sidewalks from one frontier to the other - and its hugeness makes it possible for everyone to invent his own city. My London is not your London, though everyone's Washington, DC is pretty much the same.
The London Embassy - Paul Theroux
woodgnome no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old February 26th, 2013, 09:04 PM   #140
DeFiBkIlLeR
SNP DEFEATED
 
DeFiBkIlLeR's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2012
Posts: 1,597
Likes (Received): 508

What is the point.?

How can they approve the same scheme they've just rejected, without looking like complete morons (which they are).?

Acting like morons and admitting it to the world are different things entirely.
DeFiBkIlLeR no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Thread Tools
Rate This Thread
Rate This Thread:

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 07:46 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu