Skyscrapers in London

[MikeH]

The gherkin rules. More like that please.

[chequita guevara]

Originally posted by Patroklos
Didn't Paris just put its bigger buildings in a single district away from most of the historical stuff?

Yes, but the reason for that is because underground Paris can't support the weight of a skyscraper. It's the catacombs, you see. They've made the bedrock a Swiss cheese, and thus unsuitable for heavy buildings.

[Provost Harrison]

And here is the picture of the proposed Bishopsgate Tower, the other one I mentioned...



It is the tall one in the middle, the Leadenhall building (approved for construction) is just to the right of it...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Sn00py
It's about time London started building skyscrapers, what took them so long?

Oh, little things called building regulations, the London Building Acts, conservation areas, listed buildings and good taste.

Having seen what happens when you completely remove impediments to erecting hideous tall buildings in the pursuit of a fast buck (London Docklands Development Zone) and having to live with a view of Canary Wharf, I can honestly say that an excellent strategic view of London from Greenwich has been utterly ruined by a non-descript clutch of Anywheresville buildings.

"It seems to be corporate ego or ambition. It's Master of the Universe syndrome. "You feel important. It is partly commercial, partly psychological and partly corporate," said Paul Finch, editorial director of the Architects' Journal and deputy chairman of the Commission for Architecture and Built Environment (Cabe).

But he struck a note of caution that London's newest landmarks needed to be distinctive in design.

Peter Rees, the City planning officer for the Corporation of London, said: "The skyline is not going to become Manhattan over the next five years." But there will be a cluster of tall buildings around Tower 42 east of the Bank of England, in a location that will not jeopardise views of St Paul's Cathedral, he said. "We are not doing this to change the skyline. "We are doing it because we need more offices surrounded by public transport." Without skyscrapers some companies may take their business elsewhere to cities like New York, Chicago, Hong Kong or Tokyo, it is feared. A combination of prestige, views, accommodation needs and the creation of centres of excellence explain why companies want these buildings, he said. As for the public, he said: "It is amazing how they are warming to the idea of tall buildings."

Mayor Ken Livingstone shares a positive view of tall buildings in the right places. He has said he expects to see a limited number of very tall buildings developed - about one a year - with these most likely to be in the City, Canary Wharf and some other town centre locations. Much of the development in the City seems driven by the insurance sector.

Nicholas Antram, the London region's assistant regional director, said: "It would have been a brave decision to reject it on heritage grounds in a location in need of regeneration and in an area where there are three existing tall buildings." English Heritage insists tall buildings have to be well-planned and of high architectural quality. "We must make sure they go in the right places and don't have an impact on our cherished heritage. "We only have to look around London to see the mistakes of the 1960s," said Mr Antram.

by Margaret Ryan
BBC News Online



Or the 1980s and 1990s.

Small is beautiful:

http://www.findaproperty.com/agent.aspx?agentid=1361&opt=prop&pid=240208

[Provost Harrison]

There is no denying that the 60s were a disaster but we're not talking about that kind of half-arsed cheap construction...

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison


There is no denying that the 60s were a disaster but we're not talking about that kind of half-arsed cheap construction...

Remind me again- how did the architecturally uninspired Canary Wharf buildings come to be built ?


Oh, that's right- over the top of any objections from any locals, property developers were given free rein to stick up any old crap because planning rules and regulations had been virtually suspended for them by a very helpful right wing government in search of easy money and a Guangzhou type economic development zone.


Oh wait, that has a familiar ring to it...

http://bookshop.universitiesuk.ac.uk/downloads/regionallon.pdf

Market driven planning I believe it was euphemistically referred to...

[Provost Harrison]

I'm not reading some 100-odd page pdf, get real!

The thing is, you've got to be a bit more rational. I certainly don't think Docklands is anything like as bad as you make out and make for a pretty nice view from Greenwich. But I can imagine you Prince Charles type won't be happy unlessevery new building is clad in Wedgewood and thatched

[OzzyKP]

Originally posted by TheStinger
As everyone who has ever watched US movies knows the only thing to be seen in london is Big Ben and red buses

And those guys with the big hats.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
I'm not reading some 100-odd page pdf, get real!

But I can imagine you Prince Charles type won't be happy unlessevery new building is clad in Wedgewood and thatched

A rather pathetic and inaccurate characterization of someone who's campaigned to save 20th Century buildings under threat of demolition.

Still, if you want to show you don't who you're talking about, be my guest.

I was after all the one who created the thread to celebrate when the Swiss Re building was awarded the RIBA Stirling prize for 2004.


So sit and swivel on this:

[C0ckney]

i hate it when this happens, but i agree with molly.

[molly bloom]

Originally posted by C0ckney
i hate it when this happens, but i agree with molly.

You're allowed to be right occasionally too.

[Provost Harrison]

Originally posted by molly bloom



A rather pathetic and inaccurate characterization of someone who's campaigned to save 20th Century buildings under threat of demolition.

Still, if you want to show you don't who you're talking about, be my guest.

I was after all the one who created the thread to celebrate when the Swiss Re building was awarded the RIBA Stirling prize for 2004.


So sit and swivel on this:

Oh bloke with a bird's name, don't be so utterly pretentious and arrogant. If you don't agree with me, say so. These issues are so subjective anyway, I just happen to think you're speaking out of your arse

[Dis]

Re: Skyscrapers in London

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
As many of you have noticed, whether visitors or residents, that London is relatively short on big buildings, at least until very recently. I have been flicking through some of the proposed buildings that are either under construction and proposed. I think this is a good thing, about time there was more floorspace to bring the prices of space down and they look impressive! The London Bridge Tower is due to be constructed (307m) and I was looking at another proposed building, the Bishopsgate Tower at 308m. Will be cool if these two are built

And there are several other buildings being proposed. There is another one called Ecotower which is proposed that would be 485m.

It will be nice to see the skyline of London looking a little bigger

about friggin' time you guys got into the 20th century.

Now only Washington D.C. is in the dark ages.

[Dis]

okay, it's time to show off picture's of your city's skyline. Post them here. I don't want to threadjack your thread provost, I can make a new one if you so desire. I figure since we already have picture's of Paris' skyline, I may as well post my city's skyline.

okay I couldn't find any good skyline pictures. This one is taken from too high of a perspective and it's a few years old. It doesn't show Wynn Las Vegas which is a huge friggin' building. And looks very large at ground level when viewing from the east or the west. But all the pictures I find on the internet are overhead views from the north or south. . the picture doesn't even show the Palms. It's really obsolete. Yes in 5 years every picture of my city is obsolete. That's how fast things change.



this picture only shows a few of our buildings



here's downtown: completely separate from the strip



not that cities should aspire to look like mine. My city is godawful ugly. But in a good way.

ahh, I found a picture of Wynn Las Vegas







a better picture of downtown:

[Provost Harrison]

Let me see...



Here is what they are proposing in a few years time...

A prediction of what it may look like in a few years