LONDON | 20 Fenchurch Street | 160m | 36 fl | U/C

[london lad]

Originally Posted by newcastle kid

Maybe, nowadays. But now most european cities are getting skyscrapers, la defense just doesnt have the height or quality to keep its current status. I agree with you the grande arch is great but apart from that, nothing REALLY stands out.

If you look at it in that context then CW is nothing special either- mostly dull blocks, especially on Bank St.


Everybody calm down- This isn't my city is better than your city lets just stick to what this forum is about architecture in all its forms & leave the petty rivalry for elsewhere. Some people on the UK do sometimes go off on one & sprout stuff that antagonises other people who are just as happy to return one silly comment with another.

As Dom points out London has come a long way since 1999 & will ocntinue to do so but so are other cities- Each to there own- a lot of cities have some good proposals.

What this London & the London2012 thread shows is that Londons getting a lot of quality proposals that over the coming years will increase. Prior to 1999 The general concensus in London was very anti high-rise including the coporation of London (where most of the new skyscrapers are planned for) which is why there are lots of groundscrapers in London. What we are seeing now are many of the schemes drawn up in this time being built with skyscrapers being the next step for most of the property companies. These companies spend millions of punds getting thse through planning & they dont do it just to keep alot of skyscraper enthusiasts happy on a random website- they are serious players which means a lot fo these proposals will get built- Look at Shanghais WFC -Thats been kicking around since the mid-90's & is nwo being built-Most skyscrapers from inception to finished buld take a good few years. Obviously I'd like all these to be built asap but thats probably why im on a skyscraper forum

Also because of such reluctance prior any scheme that gets proposeds has to be of a very high quality- which is generally why the new proposals are of a high standard.

Skylines arn't a 20th century invention & most cities have there own unique one so lets all just stick to whatever the threads topic is.

This new tower sounds of a high quality to go with Bishopsgate 122 LH et al & I hope we get to see renderings soon to justify the 5 pages this thread has already generated

[london_manchester]

I love every single skyscraper proposed and approved for london especially LBT Vauxhall tower, bishopsgate towers, heron tower, leadenhead etc hope they all get built

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

As do we all!

[london_manchester]

i love london i love it even more if it has a fantastic skyline

[Newcastle Guy]

Originally Posted by london lad

If you look at it in that context then CW is nothing special either- mostly dull blocks, especially on Bank St.

I dont think Canary eharf is amazing, but I do think it is better then La defense. For a few reasons:

1. Height. Canary wharf has alot more height than la defense
2. Quality. The wharf builds all its skyscrapers to a very high quality and they have very nice cladding, where as la defense is looking abit drab. Maybe the new towers will brighten it up abit, they look nice.
3. Street level. From what I have seen, the wharf is MUCH more pleasant than la defense, it seems alot more time has been taken to landscape the areas.
4. Location. I have to admit, la defense does have a nice location and looks great on the overall Paris skyline, but nothing beats a waterside skyline. When you see the towers at night reflected in the water they look amazing. I am so excited about seeing CW when I go to London shortly.

Not being evil, its just some visual observations and constructive critiscism

[weird]

Yes, more height and water.. but LD has more quantity!

[Newcastle Guy]

For now, until the large Wood Wharf development is built near canary wharf

I do like La Defense, I personally just prefer CW.



This is a good view

[Newcastle Guy]

I LOVE these though:







Can someone get a better pic of La Defense in that same view?

[Rem]

i'm going to try.....

[Newcastle Guy]

That night view is very nice, and that first building you posted is my favourite from La defense

[Rem]

me too, the EDF tower is my favourite from La Défense, i find that it looks like a veil inflated by the wind. it's nice

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

Originally Posted by weird

Yes, more height and water.. but LD has more quantity!

Well it's gonna lose the quantity battle as well in the near future, with all the projects going on at CW. That's the main difference between the two at the moment: La Defense is basically finished, and doesn't have a lot going on for it, and not a lot needs to be done really; whereas CW is Europe's, if not the world's, single largest commerical property development containing over 12 million square feet of office space. It is growing an an enormous rate and there is such a lot of land to build on! It isn't like the City district of London that has lots of existing buildings on it, becasue CW was, untill the late 80's, a deserted wasteland, and there is so much scope for new developments. Whether you prefer LD or not, you cannot fail to notice that CW is going to overtake LD in terms of quantity in coming years, and probably quality too. Plus, CW has a rival within London-the City area-that is competing with it for the title of London's premiere financial and business district, meaning both sites want to better their area by building high quality skyscrapers and mid-rise office blocks, which can only be a good thing! And plenty of people are ready to invest in cheap land near the docklands where it is a prime location for skyscrapers that are in much demand, especially with all these new transportation upgrades to the docklands: the dockland's light railway, bus routes, new bridges, boat ports, the new, thriving City airport etc etc.

In terms of quality, neither CW nor LD have anything spectacular and unique, and neither can hope to compete with the quality of skyscrapers approved or proposed for London's City district!

The Columbus Tower (still fully approved, looks dead, but don't give up on it yet, the website says it is still confirmed to go ahead, and even if it doesn't, there will most likely be a similar or better tower to go up in its place).


North Quay1


Rivrside South


Milharbour (Pan Peninsula tower)


Heron Quays West


New providenece Wharf


New Wood Wharf development:



And that's just the projects we know of at the moment, there will be doesens more to come throughout the next few years!

A great pic showing the beauty of the water surrounding Canry Wharf, with the approved new Aquiva hotel and 170-metre Canary Wharf vessel:

[Newcastle Guy]

Wood wharf will make Canary whars skyline ALOT bigger.

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

Yer, I love that image, and I love the fact that they are developing the ground and street level as well, lots of green areas....in fact, is it my imagination or do most of those buildings have grass growing on top of them...?

[Newcastle Guy]

Indeed they have grass on the roofs, I love buildings like that, much more 'friendly looking' (If you know what I mean) than regular flat-topped skyscrapers.

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

Me too!

Can someone explain what this flat orange and white thing is in front of the HSCB tower:



It looks a prime place for a skyscraper, but all I see is a wierd orange thing...explanation anyone???

[DarJoLe]

It's just a pattern they've painted on the plot, just to give it a bit of colour. there are plans for a 12 storey building on this site, but these have been put on hold until the Crossrail station is built in the dock next door (which at the moment is 2013 - but it's delayed indefinately).

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

Ah thanx.

I posted this comment in the London 2012 thread, but I suppose it's more relevant here, so I'll post it again:


Official news on that replacement skyscraper for 20 Fenchurch Street:
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=551


03 Mar 2006 > 20 Fenchurch Street Set For Knackers Yard

One of the sixties mid-rise towers in the City of London, 20 Fenchurch Street, could be set for the knackers yard with the announcement that the architect Rafael Vinoly is working on a replacement building for it.
At 45 floors of grade A office space it should come in at around 200 metres and make a substantial difference to the City of London skyline, particularly when viewed from Waterloo extending the cluster to the right of the viewer or Bankside where it would appear most prominent.
Vinoly has been trying to drum up support for a while with opposition coming from the usual quarters of the heritage lobby worried about views of and from the Tower of London.
Further complicating matters were the costs that the design has been running up since then with it going 35% over budget at one point and becoming almost untenably expensive to build.
Disturbed at this the developers called in John Shaw of Foster and Partners to get a ratchet down on the costs whilst still keeping the overall design quality up.
Those who have seen the design have compared it to both a television and a 1950s Ericsson phone leading to much confusion over the true shape.
The current tower on the site is 91 metres, occupied by Dresdner Kleinwort Wasserstein and owned by Land Securities who purchased it from DRKW in 2004 for an unspecified sum.
Much sympathy goes to Churchill Securities who had the foresight of commissioning Wilkinson Eyre to design a nearby tower at 168 Fenchurch Street in 2000 back in the days when tall buildings were still really controversial. Sadly for them they didn't own the site but still full marks for the vision.
The full design for the new 20 Fenchurch Street tower should be out later in 2006.



I'm still totally confused about what this new tower will look like, I mean 'both a television and a 1950s Ericsson phone'.....what kinda imagery is that eh???? I just get an image of a big bulky television set...and I don't even know what the 1950's Ericsson phone looks like....does anyone have any pictures of it??

But that is a prime place for a skyscraper, as the article, and wjfox's earlier renderings show, it should add more width to the developing skyline. I just hope its a good design!!

[DarJoLe]

It's a shit design. So incredibly hideous I can't believe the architect even considered this for London's skyline.

[capslock]

there's a render of the vonoly scheme in london in todays' standard - not a very good one mind you.