Heron Quays West | Canary Wharf | 198m/147m/95m | 34/22/13 fl | App

[Mr Bricks]

Looks amazing!

[DarJoLe]

I'm sure that the Rogers design wasn't square like that. Looking at the renderings it seemed the north and south facades were at an angle to the dock side, whilst the podium block maintained a parallel with the dock edge. It's a shame they disappeared from the Rogers website, I'm sure there was an explanation that having the facades at an angle was to create a bit of diversity in the Canary Wharf skyline.

[jef]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

I'm sure that the Rogers design wasn't square like that. Looking at the renderings it seemed the north and south facades were at an angle to the dock side, whilst the podium block maintained a parallel with the dock edge.

I first thought about a trapezoidal shape. But check this out:



It fits with the site plan and alignment with the other towers at Bank Street.
They are typical square boxes I am afraid.

[Jonny 5]

I'm pretty sure the site plan looked something like this.



You can see in this rendering that the towers are angled to the Bank Street buildings and Riverside South.

[jef]

The renderings are just inaccurate, look at Riverside which is not correctly aligned with the bank street groundscraper.
And the last one is not consistent with the others.



In any cases they are revising the design and I reckon CWG will build square boxes aligned with the other bank street towers and RS1.

[seafire.I]

[QUOTE=Jonny 5;12896654]I'm pretty sure the site plan looked something like this.



??? Im sure that Heron Quays West would'nt be alighned like that......it would ruin the entire orientation of Canary Wharf........no, i think as jef said, it'll be alighned with Bank st's Buildings, and RS

[SELondoner]

Wouldn't be surprised if you were right about them orientating them the same as the other towers, but personally I don't see any reason why they have to be aligned with the rest of the estate, I think some other angles would be more interesting.

[Jonny 5]

If you look at the base of the towers in the renderings the corners of both towers are next to the road, if the towers are square like the aerial rendering then the plan I posted must be correct.

Probably the reason Canary Wharf didn't like the design.

Is Rogers still the architect for this site?

[jef]

I think it is Rogers Stirk Harbour. I bet they will submit their plans after they receive pp for the revised RS scheme in fall 2007.
btw, you have been off this forum for a while isn't it? welcome back!

[Jack Rabbit Slim]

Wow, for some reason I have been avoiding this thread because I didn't think there would be any news worth hearing, but I come on, look back a few pages and discover HQW is back on the menu!!!

Possibly my favourite design of all the proposed CW skyscrapers, love the colouring, the shape and the overhang of glass extending at the top.

So can someone sum this up for me: at what stage is this project at now, what are it's chances of going ahead (and when), what are the chances of the old Rogers design being used, and is there a possibility of a height increase?

[Newcastle Guy]

It is still in pre-planning, but It should be unveiled and proposed in the next couple of months, if they want to start in late 2008.

There is no way to know what form the development will take at the moment, but I expect atleast 2 skyscrapers, hopefully another 200m+.

[wjfox]

2 million square feet on a site this small can only mean a pair of skyscrapers, HSBC height or taller.

[Medo]

I want a pair of identical towers 210m each.

[eXSBass]

Originally Posted by Jack Rabbit Slim

So can someone sum this up for me: at what stage is this project at now, what are it's chances of going ahead (and when), what are the chances of the old Rogers design being used, and is there a possibility of a height increase?

Here's my input if it means anything.
I think they're beyond the pre planning stage.
I reckon it has a high chance of going ahead if the hight is (50m < Height < 230m)
I think some of Roger's features will be retained as I reckon they'll aproach Roger's practise for a re-design.
Height increase is a probability as they're looking for 2mil sq ft.

[eddie88]

Originally Posted by jef

2 renderings showing location, massing and height of the Rogers scheme in pre-planning.

looks amazing

[jimbo]

Originally Posted by wjfox2002

2 million square feet on a site this small can only mean a pair of skyscrapers, HSBC height or taller.

I walked along the site yesterday (might have been following Chest actually.....), and I think that they will have to do a considerable amount of reclamation as its incredibly narrow. jef, those two massing images are fantastic.

[snail456]

Looking at the google earth model i would say that the estate needs this scheme in order to tie RS in with the rest of the cluster.

[Cat man do]

Originally Posted by jimbo

I walked along the site yesterday (might have been following Chest actually.....), and I think that they will have to do a considerable amount of reclamation as its incredibly narrow. jef, those two massing images are fantastic.

Mmm, of course a lot of earth will be produced by RS. What is required for reclamation?

[Jonny 5]

Originally Posted by wjfox2002

2 million square feet on a site this small can only mean a pair of skyscrapers, HSBC height or taller.

Isn't the original Rogers design pretty close to 2 million square ft anyway?
They would only need to raise the height of the lower tower. Although that would cause some light issues for the buildings to the north.

In Jef's Google Earth image you can see 25 Cabot Square would become the ideal place for a 250m+ tower in 5-10 years.

[Zedferret]

Jef, are your Google models publicly available? I got the SN package, but i'd like the new RS, HQW, Landmark, ect.