SkyscraperCity Forum banner

North Quay | Canary Wharf | 65, 53, 40, 36, 33, 17 fl | Site Prep

297K views 729 replies 180 participants last post by  geogregor 
#1 ·
The press release:

18 January 2007

PLANNING PERMISSION GRANTED FOR OVER 370,000 SQ M DEVELOPMENT ON LAND ADJOINING CANARY WHARF


On 12 January 2007 the London Borough of Tower Hamlets granted planning permission to Norquil Limited* for the development of 372,660 square metres (gross) of commercial office space on the North Quay site immediately north of One Canada Square, Canary Wharf. The development will adjoin the proposed Isle of Dogs Crossrail station which is part of the transport project currently before Parliament.

Cesar Pelli, the architect of the original Canary Wharf tower, designed the scheme, in association with SMC Alsop as the architects for the public realm areas, which comprises three linked buildings, two of which are towers, 43 storeys (221metres) and 37 storeys (209metres) tall respectively. The scheme will also include a major new performance and public exhibition space and a south facing dockside promenade with an additional 5,324 square metres (gross) of shops, restaurants and bars and pedestrian links to Poplar DLR station and Canary Wharf itself.

The development, which is expected to be completed once the Crossrail station is built, will provide space for approximately 17,000 jobs, more than 4,000 of which are projected to be filled by residents of the East End. As part of the planning process Norquil Limited has entered into an agreement with Tower Hamlets to provide a range of local benefits and improvements including community support, transport improvements and open space with an estimated value of about £20 million.

*Norquil Limited is the freeholder of the site and is wholly owned by Canary Wharf Group plc.



 
See less See more
2
#3 ·
Brilliant. Good stuff. About time. By far the best design proposed in the Estate bar One Canada Square and the HSBC building.

When does the Crossrail Station begin enabling works?

Edit: It would have been nice for the tower in the foreground to have a sloping roof like it's neighbour tower.

Edit 2: To give you an image of the sheer magnitude of this development, the shortest middle building is about the size of 51 Lime Street, The Limey! :D
 
#4 ·
Weee hay! another impressive erection for the list...I cant wait!
 
#9 ·
...they look like something from 1980's Houston and they wont be built for at least another 10 yrs - a complete disgrace, does Canary Wharf PLC have no interest whatsoever in reflecting contemporary architecture...bland, old fashioned, bleak monstrosities. Just because corporate clients like these glass shoe boxes the rest of London has to live with them - disappointing at best.
 
#10 ·
frustrating when comparing the sort of architecture being tried out in other cities and then think about the money floating about in office developments you would expect it would make it a prime target for flair and innovation rather than lumping all the burden on the small publicly funded cultural projects. Still it is better than most of the Canary Wharf architecture... but then this is a result of a 25 year evolution?!
 
#13 ·
North Quay is slightly better than most of the other towers at Canary Wharf - but that is meaningless considering the 80% of the buildings in the estate I would consider to be eye-sores - if the Bank Street Towers were in the City they would be ripe for redevelopment - they look like the Barbican offices from a few years back.
 
#14 ·
I thought most planning applications have a life-span of 2 years though - so if they don't build until after crossrail, surely there's ample opportunity for Tower Hamlets to reject and ask for a re-design? their planning department will have completely different staff in 10 years I'm sure...maybe some visionaries like some of you! I think this approval is basically an approval of height and density - not design...
 
#15 ·
They will be built in the medium term. Of course, the precise timing always depends on the property cycle.

The average long-run quarterly take-up at Canary Wharf is around 25,000 sqm per quarter, that is 100,000 sqm per year.

There are still around 70,000 sqm available for construction at Churchill Place and 30,000 sqm available at 40 Bank Street (floors 2-19). Riverside South is 165,000 net office space. Overall, it makes 265,000 sqm, that means less than 3 years to let this space "on average". Existing supply is limited and tenants may be forced to relocate elsewhere in the Docklands or even move back to the City because of this lack of supply: Barclays for example has been forced to let space at Exchange Tower.

This is why Canary Wharf has negociated to obtain planning permission for this scheme. It is crucial for them to increase their office supply to match demand. They already started construction on the substation that will be part of the North Quay scheme. Construction of the substation will take 3 years. Canary Wharf plans to deliver Riverside South in 2010, North Quay around 2012 and Heron Quays West by 2016 at the latest. This is in line with average quarterly take-up as I said.

Re. architecture, I agree with Potto: it is neutral. But better than existing towers, except One Canada Square. Cesar Pelli has designed these towers to be more in line with One Canada Square than Bank Street towers. I am confident.
 
#16 ·
Yes, the middle section does look a bit haphazard, but then the renders arn't the most realistic I've ever seen, so it's hard to tell what it's really gonna look like.

I'm a bit confused here. The first picture Jef posted (the rendering) shows a different version of the taller tower then on the second picture (the Google Earth image)...what's up with that? The rendering shows the tower just going staright up to the top, but the GE pic shows a slight incline similar to the smaller tower...which one is it?

Obviously this isn't a short-term proposal, it probably won't get off the ground untill about 2010/2012 at the earliest, depending on how fast they build the CR station and the demand for office space. The designs arn't anything spectacular obviously, but I don't think they're bad either, and the sheer scale of the project is just too impressive too ignore!

:cheers:
 
#17 ·
The first picture Jef posted (the rendering) shows a different version of the taller tower then on the second picture (the Google Earth image)...what's up with that? The rendering shows the tower just going staright up to the top, but the GE pic shows a slight incline similar to the smaller tower...which one is it?:
The Google Earth image shows the 3D model I made for Google. I used the plans released by Cesar Pelli. Google got in touch with me to make a "Virtual London" collection that would be available to all forumers. We will see.

The two renderings are the same. The angle is just different. Hence you cant see the top of the official rendering and the curve.
 
#21 ·
I like these, but being highly dependent on Crossrail you have to say that it is sadly unlikely to be delivered to programme.

Rumours are though that the government will close the funding gap for Crossrail but not until Gordon Brown's taken over and can give this present to London.
 
#22 ·
I can't say im swayed by the architecture but thats typical CW & at least the heights impressive- They are ok but they could be better. I have always thought the middle building looks a mess & doesn't sit with the two other towers. God I hope someone builds the columbus tower- It would be nice to see a curvy tower with a half decent crown.

These towers along with the two office towers that form part of the Wood Wharf masterplan are the final part in the CW jigsaw & once they are finished possibly by the middle of the next decade then thats about the limit of CW's expansion unless the Corporation of London decides to sell them the Billingsgate Site .

BTW have they dropped the Will Allsop plans for ground level & the bridge connecting NQ with the rest of the estate. This added a bit of flair to the scheme & it would be a shame if it was jettisoned.
 
#24 ·
I for one like these buildings and am indeed very glad they are getting built. People are moaning yet again about the style and look of the building but yet again we cant have every building trying to out do each other! Canary Wharf is a modern business estate and I know plenty of people including myself who love it, and at the end of the day, BOXy skyscrapers have far more efficient floor lay outs than fancy rounded iconic towers and by that, what would you prefer being a skyscraper fan, an estate full of groundscrapers or one full of high-rises? lets not be too fussy here..
 
#29 ·
I for one like these buildings and am indeed very glad they are getting built. People are moaning yet again about the style and look of the building but yet again we cant have every building trying to out do each other!...
what about ecological architecture? What about sky gardens for office workers? What about air flow around buildings, what about visual stimulation?

I feel it is a tad careless not to invest something into a bit of innovation when there is the money to do it. This isnt about iconic architecture but about base architecture.
 
#27 ·
^^^ could you be more specific as to what part is being scraped?
Alsop's website is being redone so I can't get to the renderings, but it's basically the green bridge across the dock in the first rendering of the original post.

It was to connect from the winter garden of North Quay, across the dock and into the shopping mall under One Canada Square. Whilst I expect this will still go ahead (it will be the main connection between the Crossrail station and the Jubilee Line) Alsop's idea was the turn it into a half enclosed garden, with grass and colourful urban structures along its length.
 
#32 ·
What's different about the North Quay towers to the other biggies is how they aren't square on their floorplan. From the west and east they'll be quite wide from the north and south quite thin compared to the other big three. Riverside South is the opposite.



 
Top