Discussion in 'London and the South East' started by editor, Jul 11, 2018.
'Cheesegrater 2' City skyscraper approved
Fugus Uglius Maximus.
Oh good 6000 workers, nowhere to live but always somewhere to work.
Not another one, it won't be long before London loses it's own unique image and become another identikit US style city full of skyscrapers and ugly modern corporate architecture. I can only hope that the next Mayor will put in place a ban on any new skyscrapers from being built in the city.
Perhaps every Sept 11 they could model what would happen in these buildings if they were struck by an airliner, with everyone above say floor 35 being told to imagine their services were no longer required and those beneath being reminded of the inevitable consequences of breathing in building dust.
all around these skyscrapers are 80/90s offices that no one wants the old insurance side off the city is awash with empty buildings that have fallen out of favour and being banked for possible future development. So utterly wasteful
Making London grate, again. Obviously.
I thought much of London's own unique had long since disappeared to be honest.
I quite like it.
As far as I understand, they have to be this kind of slanted cheesegrater style because of the sight line rules guaranteeing views of St Pauls. Surely this must satisfy that requirement at a minimum.
With some careful planning and a few more construction projects they could aim to spell out LONDON on the skyline from some viewing angles.
It's not a bad one, as these things go. Interesting rippled effect to the facade. Distinctive shape.
One thing I find encouraging about these new towers is the incredible amount of space given over to bicycle facilities. An entire floor of the basement of this building (which is quite a bit wider than the tower part - there's a 5 story podium) is double-stacked cycle parking, changing rooms and showers.
The cynic in me says that more cheap space below ground filled with shower and bikes means that floor space above ground can be more expensive as it doesn’t contain showers and bikes.
Nah, it's enforced by planning. Underground space is not cheap; digging holes is expensive, complicated and time-consuming.
I think it more likely that this is the last part of a complex three-dimensional sigil that will, when complete, open a gateway for the Elder Gods to finally come and provide a proper Brexit solution.
Surely also, it's just practical and preferable. Park/pickup the bike and shower/change in the same place. I'm sure most people don't want to be trudging through the building in their lycra to get to designated personal changing/showering area.
Pretty sure they need foundations.
Perhaps they should put the bike park on one of the top floors, instead of a cafe or something. That would defiantly make so much more sense.
Yes, but those are just piles driven (very far) down into the clay. To actually excavate habitable space, hold back the ground pressure, keep the water out etc. is very expensive (but not as expensive as the reduction in rents that would be caused by putting above-ground areas out of profitable use by turning them into cycle parking). If planning didn't mandate a whole floor's worth of cycle parking, the habitable basement of the building would be one floor shallower.
What will be enforced by planning will be enough bike spaces for x % of employees, the decision to put them in the basement will be commercial.
It's going that way but I see no reason not to oppose it. London should be for Londoners, not property developers and rich foreigners.
Separate names with a comma.