Wood Wharf: major expansion of Canary Wharf | 200m/187m/182m/154m | Approved - Page 3

DarJoLe · June 24th, 2006, 12:47 PM

The Dome is such an amazing piece of architecture. It's a real shame the British public are so cynical they couldn't support it as an example of how amazing British architects are.

Newcastle Guy · June 24th, 2006, 01:01 PM

I agree, I love the dome, and it will be really amazing in time for the olympics.

JDRS · June 24th, 2006, 09:42 PM

I really like the Dome but there is a lot of critiscism and people are sceptical of it because of the fiasco involved in running it during 2001. However I know alot of people who actually like the dome from an architectural viewpoint - I certainly do. And I think people will change their minds more after the conversion.

mulattokid · June 24th, 2006, 10:24 PM

aI am so glad to hear people say all this about the dome....as always, because of politics, money and the press, it became an objectof ridicule instead of being ( I think) the biggest dome ever built and something to be proud of....a real shame. We dont know how lucky we are in this country.

Jamandell (d69) · June 25th, 2006, 12:53 AM

The Dome will be a fantastic asset to the city when it's completed (again) next year. The plans for the O2 Arena sounds absolutely fantastic!

samsonyuen · June 25th, 2006, 05:26 PM

I really like the dome too. I hope its renovation will suit our needs better.

london lad · June 28th, 2006, 12:36 PM

I emailed the developers about woodwharf asking whats going on- they said they will be consulting the public in the later part of the year & hope to have a planning application with a rogers masterplan in early 2007. So the timeframe has slipped by about 6mths

Newcastle Guy · June 28th, 2006, 12:43 PM

Looking forward to seeing the Rogers masterplan!

I hope we get something as good as- if not better than the grand arch in Paris.

mrout · June 28th, 2006, 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

The Dome is such an amazing piece of architecture. It's a real shame the British public are so cynical they couldn't support it as an example of how amazing British architects are.

I'm not aware of anyone criticising it architecturally.

It's criticised rightly as a waste of money and an ultimately flawed project. It's been largely unused since 2001 and costs a fortune to keep it from falling into disrepair.

As a structure/building it's impressive and fantastic. Worth £750 million though? I don't think so.

CroyDan · June 28th, 2006, 03:17 PM

I agree with mrout. The dome is a great design but ultimately to cost a lot of money and what was inside the dome for the public during 2000 was absolute tosh.

Its potential has been wasted for years now. Did'nt it host Miss World a few years ago...if it did, says it all really!

JGG · June 28th, 2006, 05:15 PM

Think about all the churches and the palaces built in the centuries gone by. At the time, that money could probably have been spent better on other things, like proper housing, sanitation etc. Was St Pauls good value for money at the time? Yet, these are the monuments we admire today. The commercial sector, for obvious economic reasons, is less of a generator of great monuments. The dome, now it has found its proper destiny will also be a monument for future generations. The problem was the poor execution with a lot of politicians involved. Anyway, I am very glad the dome is there and I do not regret the money spent on it because if it was not the dome, the money would probably have been spent on something worse (like a £20 bio NHS super-computer) ...

jef · June 28th, 2006, 06:30 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by london lad

I emailed the developers about woodwharf asking whats going on- they said they will be consulting the public in the later part of the year & hope to have a planning application with a rogers masterplan in early 2007. So the timeframe has slipped by about 6mths

Does it mean they will submit pa for Wood Wharf East (residential) and Wood Wharf West (commercial) at the same time in early 2007 instead of phasing out the pa (stage 1: residential, stage 2: commercial). Sounds good.

Skid-Mark · June 28th, 2006, 07:30 PM

when you say "rogers" are we saying Richard Rogers? if so was that earlier wood wharf plan really his, bit bland for him.

jef · October 25th, 2006, 07:39 PM

It sounds the signature element - the arch - will be replaced by a tower. The redevelopment may be closer to this with an additional tower also opposite to 20 CP (green roof in the background):

[IMG]http://i13.************/2cp2ir9.jpg[/IMG]

rickster2k · October 25th, 2006, 10:08 PM

tbh, i thought the signature 'arch' tower building was a bit tacky, like something you would find in La Defence or Dubai. Lets hope for some quality, tall towers as replacement, the big blue tower below looks around 180 - 200m.

Skid-Mark · October 25th, 2006, 10:15 PM

Hard to tell much from that, where did you find that jef???

AXISPAW · October 25th, 2006, 10:34 PM

yeah i agree rickster, get rid of the stupid arch, and get some talls in there. to the point of when its getting built i read that ballymore are requesting in early 2007. plus dont ballymore have the power to decide when to build it without canary wharf? im sure i read that ballymore only need to consult the wharf on this because its so close and they need to work together, if you see what i mean?

***wjfox*** · October 25th, 2006, 11:18 PM

What in God's name are you talking about? I'd hardly call the Grande Arche "tacky"... you might like to know it was voted the 2nd best midrise in the world -
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=319255

This was our chance to finally have something different and quirky in the Docklands. Now we're just going to be stuck with a load of boring unimaginative slabs like everything else in the area.

eXSBass · October 25th, 2006, 11:22 PM

Sad to see the arch go tbh. Although, admitidlly, it was a little reminiscent of La Defence, seeing something similar there would have been great!

As Fox above me said, just having "slabs" in it's place restricts the human imagination to think outside the box, pun intended.

DarJoLe · October 25th, 2006, 11:36 PM

What the hell has happened to Wood Wharf? God talk about dumbing down.

I suppose it was to be expected now with Canary Wharf onboard. Eugh.

June 24th, 2006, 10:24 PM	#44
mulattokid BLAND Join Date: Feb 2005 Location: London Posts: 8,532 Likes (Received): 149	aI am so glad to hear people say all this about the dome....as always, because of politics, money and the press, it became an objectof ridicule instead of being ( I think) the biggest dome ever built and something to be proud of....a real shame. We dont know how lucky we are in this country. __________________ 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 Scrotum resembles a brain - requisite with both hemispheres, and its truncated spinal cord - always in search of sensation? (Mark Joseph 2008)

October 25th, 2006, 11:22 PM	#59
eXSBass Tea. Earl grey. Hot. Join Date: Oct 2004 Location: Leeds, West Yorkshire Posts: 2,518 Likes (Received): 32	Sad to see the arch go tbh. Although, admitidlly, it was a little reminiscent of La Defence, seeing something similar there would have been great! As Fox above me said, just having "slabs" in it's place restricts the human imagination to think outside the box, pun intended. __________________ The world is my oyster.

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:

June 24th, 2006, 12:47 PM	#41
DarJoLe Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 15,782 Likes (Received): 485	The Dome is such an amazing piece of architecture. It's a real shame the British public are so cynical they couldn't support it as an example of how amazing British architects are.

June 24th, 2006, 01:01 PM	#42
Newcastle Guy Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 8,956 Likes (Received): 23	I agree, I love the dome, and it will be really amazing in time for the olympics.

June 24th, 2006, 09:42 PM	#43
JDRS Against ID Cards Join Date: Feb 2004 Location: Manchester Posts: 9,794 Likes (Received): 0	I really like the Dome but there is a lot of critiscism and people are sceptical of it because of the fiasco involved in running it during 2001. However I know alot of people who actually like the dome from an architectural viewpoint - I certainly do. And I think people will change their minds more after the conversion.

June 25th, 2006, 12:53 AM	#45
Jamandell (d69) Rocking at Glasgow Uni Join Date: May 2006 Location: Glasgow Posts: 2,649 Likes (Received): 9	The Dome will be a fantastic asset to the city when it's completed (again) next year. The plans for the O2 Arena sounds absolutely fantastic!

June 25th, 2006, 05:26 PM	#46
samsonyuen SSLL Join Date: Sep 2003 Location: Canary Wharf > CityPlace Posts: 8,505 Likes (Received): 0	I really like the dome too. I hope its renovation will suit our needs better.

June 28th, 2006, 12:36 PM	#47
london lad Registered User Join Date: Feb 2003 Location: London Posts: 8,187 Likes (Received): 80	I emailed the developers about woodwharf asking whats going on- they said they will be consulting the public in the later part of the year & hope to have a planning application with a rogers masterplan in early 2007. So the timeframe has slipped by about 6mths

June 28th, 2006, 12:43 PM	#48
Newcastle Guy Registered User Join Date: Jul 2005 Location: Portsmouth Posts: 8,956 Likes (Received): 23	Looking forward to seeing the Rogers masterplan! I hope we get something as good as- if not better than the grand arch in Paris.

June 28th, 2006, 03:17 PM	#50
CroyDan Registered User Join Date: Jan 2006 Location: London, Croydon Posts: 105 Likes (Received): 0	I agree with mrout. The dome is a great design but ultimately to cost a lot of money and what was inside the dome for the public during 2000 was absolute tosh. Its potential has been wasted for years now. Did'nt it host Miss World a few years ago...if it did, says it all really!

June 28th, 2006, 05:15 PM	#51
JGG LONDON - Westminster Join Date: May 2006 Posts: 2,841 Likes (Received): 0	Think about all the churches and the palaces built in the centuries gone by. At the time, that money could probably have been spent better on other things, like proper housing, sanitation etc. Was St Pauls good value for money at the time? Yet, these are the monuments we admire today. The commercial sector, for obvious economic reasons, is less of a generator of great monuments. The dome, now it has found its proper destiny will also be a monument for future generations. The problem was the poor execution with a lot of politicians involved. Anyway, I am very glad the dome is there and I do not regret the money spent on it because if it was not the dome, the money would probably have been spent on something worse (like a £20 bio NHS super-computer) ...

October 25th, 2006, 07:39 PM	#54
jef Registered User Join Date: Jan 2005 Location: Brussels/London Posts: 3,362 Likes (Received): 0	It sounds the signature element - the arch - will be replaced by a tower. The redevelopment may be closer to this with an additional tower also opposite to 20 CP (green roof in the background): [IMG]http://i13.************/2cp2ir9.jpg[/IMG]

October 25th, 2006, 10:08 PM	#55
rickster2k Registered User Join Date: Jan 2004 Location: Southampton Posts: 1,622 Likes (Received): 13	tbh, i thought the signature 'arch' tower building was a bit tacky, like something you would find in La Defence or Dubai. Lets hope for some quality, tall towers as replacement, the big blue tower below looks around 180 - 200m.

October 25th, 2006, 10:34 PM	#57
AXISPAW Registered User Join Date: Aug 2006 Location: Aberdeen Posts: 835 Likes (Received): 5	yeah i agree rickster, get rid of the stupid arch, and get some talls in there. to the point of when its getting built i read that ballymore are requesting in early 2007. plus dont ballymore have the power to decide when to build it without canary wharf? im sure i read that ballymore only need to consult the wharf on this because its so close and they need to work together, if you see what i mean?

October 25th, 2006, 11:18 PM	#58
*wjfox* Moderator Join Date: Nov 2002 Location: L O N D O N Posts: 35,748 Likes (Received): 1207	What in God's name are you talking about? I'd hardly call the Grande Arche "tacky"... you might like to know it was voted the 2nd best midrise in the world - http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=319255 This was our chance to finally have something different and quirky in the Docklands. Now we're just going to be stuck with a load of boring unimaginative slabs like everything else in the area.

October 25th, 2006, 11:36 PM	#60
DarJoLe Registered User Join Date: Sep 2002 Location: London Posts: 15,782 Likes (Received): 485	What the hell has happened to Wood Wharf? God talk about dumbing down. I suppose it was to be expected now with Canary Wharf onboard. Eugh.