London skyscraper developments

Discussion in 'London and the South East' started by wjfox2007, Jan 21, 2007.

  1. Tom A

    Tom A Goat among sheep

    That is a matter of personal opinion. I don't consider phallic monuments to rabid capitalism to be "beautiful".
     
  2. The_Martian

    The_Martian New Member

    Just cut the capitalism bullshit! Capitalsim has it faults yes but to see it in everything is ridiculous! Paranoia anyone?
     
  3. Tom A

    Tom A Goat among sheep

    Well what do you think is going to be in this building? Farmers? Also your architect cronies are due to be making a pretty penny if this goes ahead, aren't they now?

    The_Martian... apt name, considering your ill-informed comments up to now.
     
  4. untethered

    untethered For industry & decency

    Property development is a business, not a charity.

    Business isn't inherently wrong, but business devoid of all other restraining social and moral values is.

    Much modern development falls into that category.
     
  5. jd

    jd New Member

    The love of money is indeed the root of all evil?

    See you in church brother! :D
     
  6. BenL

    BenL New Member

    This is my first post here. To get a hurdle out of the way, I am a regular member of Skyscrapercity and the discussion on London high rises proved to be the catalyst for my joining here - although I've been a lurker here for a while. I'm a member there because it is probably the best website to find out about the developments taking place in London at the moment - architecturally and otherwise - and if anyone could care to look you can see there is a genuine love for this city amongst many of the London members, (sometimes bordering on nationalist obsession) and topics on London's urbanity very far afield from height are discussed.

    But, I digress. I'm not here as a missionary - I was just interested in rationally discussing the benefits of the specific buildings which would be left unbuilt if UNESCO have their way, as they have already done in several cities, blackmailing cities into stopping prominent modern architecture in historically significant areas.

    As a social democrat, I have no great love for the City and certainly will not attempt to argue because of the benefit these towers will provide for London's financial sector. Aesthetically, the Shard and the Bishopsgate tower are arguably the finest buildings of significant height (along with the Gherkin) which could be built in this first decade of the twenty-first century in Europe.

    Although I cannot speak for the other threatened proposal, 20 Fenchurch Street, which is quite revolting, these two towers are designed to taper off - along with other design considerations this will stop the wind tunnels common in more traditionally designed towers and they will not dominate the landscape in the oppressive way some of the Canary Wharf towers.

    The architects are world class - with Pompidou Centre designer Renzo Piano envisioning the Shard to be his epitaph to the world. To my mind, and I recognise this has been stated before; London should not remain architecturally stagnant. As a city, we have built some truly outstanding landmarks, with St. Paul's and the Palace of Westminster amongst the most prominent but it is wrong for a city to be so complacent as to rest on its laurels and the Gherkin and particularly the London Eye are becoming considered in the same postcard view of London. I do believe that the Shard would be too.

    I am not a religious person but I can accept St. Paul's as a beautiful building. I understand, and respect socialists on this board who may be unable to accept these towers, regardless of aesthetic quality, purely because of where the money comes from. If we can accept that it will be mainly private businesses (although TFL will place its headquarters in the Shard) will occupy these buildings then we can come to discuss their individual merits. The Shard will not be a fully closed off building: It will have two public viewing galleries and was closely linked with the redevelopment and restructuring of London Bridge station.

    Britain has had bad experiences with high rise buildings. The urban planners of the 60s destroyed working class community life across the country with identikit, soulless towers with few amenities and incorporated into awful city models.

    There is a difference, in that these are commercial towers, but it is wrong to consider high rise architecture to be "all the same", as a result of the mistakes of the previous generation's follies. Such prominent towers must be judged on an individual basis and should not interfere with Livingstone's designated viewing corridors.

    I do believe that if they are built, the Shard and the Bishopsgate tower will be appreciated by Londoners for time to come and can serve as modern symbols for the city.
     
  7. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    How is it not in everything?
     
  8. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    That's rather a charicature of the positions stated on this thread.
     
  9. BenL

    BenL New Member

    It's hardly a caricature. Whilst reading topics on this board I've noticed the political slant is to the left, with many anti-capitalist members. Of course I can see that not everyone is a socialist which is why I stated that there may be some socialists who for political reasons object to these skyscrapers.

    I'd be interested if you have any points on what was a lengthy post other than sniping at one sentence?
     
  10. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    Well, yes it is. There is a variety of views from a variety of people with various socialist views. To charicature them all as being against the buildings because of "where the money comes from" is rather dishonest. Its not my position for a start.
     
  11. exosculate

    exosculate a stagger with a beat


    Hi BenL - how long have you been a lurker here?
     
  12. BenL

    BenL New Member

    Not a huge length of time if I'm honest. Perhaps 4-6 weeks?

    I would believe that most on the "far left", for want of a better term, would be against buildings financed by insurance companies and banks, on ideological rather than aesthetic grounds. I do take offence at being labelled dishonest Blagsta. Presuming from your statement that you are a socialist, what is your position?
     
  13. exosculate

    exosculate a stagger with a beat


    I only ask because it isn't possible to lurk on these boards without registering, and you only registered yesterday.
     
  14. Dhimmi

    Dhimmi Half Man Half HobNob

    Careful! BenL takes offence at being labelled dishonest. :D :D ;) :rolleyes:
     
  15. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    Maybe if you read the thread you would find out eh?
     
  16. BenL

    BenL New Member

    Then I'm confused as I was able to read topics without being registered. I read the entire thread Blagsta but with the ignorant, highly nationalistic Axispaw posting diatribes any serious points you had to make were rather lost on me.
     
  17. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    You can indeed read without being logged in. I just tried it.
     
  18. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    Anyway, my position is that I'm undecided about whether I like these proposed developments or not. I love the gherkin. My main argument on this thread was taking issue with people arguing that things had to be built "for the good of the city".
     
  19. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    That would depend on the function the architecture is to perform, so simply stating a preference for a particular style of building design would be arbitrary and foolish.
     
  20. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    Given that the east end of London suffered some of the heaviest bombing, and also (according to extant London County Council archives) still has a heavy tonnage of unexploded Luftwaffe ordnance at depths that make it uneconomic to render safe, it was more convenient to tear down or leave derelict than it was to develop.
     
  21. Cid

    Cid 嗯嗯

    In berlin at the moment, today we... Ahem <waits for cybertect to turn up> Got shown around the Berlin Philharmonie by Scharoun's partner (amazing guy) then saw the philharmonike playing. We need more buildings like that - it's fucking amazing. Will start a thread with pics etc when I get back on monday.

    <gloats>
     
  22. exosculate

    exosculate a stagger with a beat

    Fair enough. I thought it wasn't possible. Must have changed it at some point.
     
  23. exosculate

    exosculate a stagger with a beat


    Fair enough.
     
  24. Blagsta

    Blagsta Minimum cage, maximum cage

    Berlin is :cool:
     
  25. Cid

    Cid 嗯嗯

    Have you been to the Philharmonie? The acoustics are :eek::cool: (I could think of no other adequate description :p).
     
  26. HackneyE9

    HackneyE9 Active Member

    Ciddy - not only have I been to the Philharmonie, I've had the honour, nay the privilige, of listenging to a concert there attended by Her Maj and Prince Philip.

    Me and my mates all sat down through the God Save The Queen bit, but the hardest thing is when the concert ends, you're all literally locked in the auditorium for nearly 10 mins so Brenda and Philip can presumably have a dump undisturbed.

    I was SCREAMING for a piss by the end of that gig, I'd drunk so much free champers, and was almost forced to assassinate the royal family simply to get to the Gents.
     
  27. HackneyE9

    HackneyE9 Active Member

    PS - to reply to Martian and his ilk further up, the Gherkin is groovy. Doesn't make the Shard or any others so.
     
  28. Crispy

    Crispy The following psytrance is baṉned: All

    You bastard :)

    Friend of mine was at the topping out ceremony of the gherkin when they winched the 'lens' on the top.
     
  29. Meltingpot

    Meltingpot Living in our pools we soon forget about the sea

    Great,didn't know they had ceremonies for things like that.
     
  30. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    Bit of a ritual for most large buildings.

    No virgin sacrifices anymore though. Pity really.
     

Share This Page

  1. This site uses cookies to help personalise content, tailor your experience and to keep you logged in if you register.
    By continuing to use this site, you are consenting to our use of cookies.
    Dismiss Notice