London - Full Summary of Projects V1.2 (No 56k!)

lucifersam said:
are you talking about the swissRe building, i think that is a stroke of excelence!

Considering London is in the top three most rich cities in the world beaten only by NY and Tokyo its about time they made it look as impressive, although in my most honest, humble and totally unpatriotic view it is by far the best city on the world.
Click to expand...

I agree. The Swiss Re building is a 24th Century building in our time. I just can't quite describe it without going long! :D
It actually does also complement it's older sister, Tower 42, the former Natwest Tower.
 
BillytheImpaler said:

Did anybody else think that in the right shot this building looks like a tall glass of beer?
Click to expand...

personally i think it looks like a glass of stale beer, not something that i would want on my table
 
I will read the whole post tomorrow. But for now Im going to give it a Ohh interesting :).

I do love London dispite only ever being down there a handful of times. It has a certain attraction, im sure one day I will live there.
 
Some very exciting proposals and developments there. I thoroughly enjoyed my midnight walk around The City in November, 2005. I, too, am in awe and love of the Swiss RE building; simply awesome in design, and works so well in the surrounding area and city-scape. I look forward to wandering around again sometime soon, hopefully with more excellent architecture and an enahnced built fabric in place. One that London deserves.

An excellent browse and read, as a town planning student I really enjoyed it and look forward to future updates. Well done eXSBass :).
 
London just cant compete in my opinion and it's going to take a bit more than a few boring, odd shaped and quite small glass towers to get anywhere near as impressive as many other places around the world.











By the way that's London, Toronto, Hong Kong, Sydney (without the opera house!) and Boston (that's there to show that even city's that don't get a lot of attention are just as if not more beautiful that many)
 
The first image of London you posted isn't fair. You didn't include the two Skyscraper clusters. Plus, it's delibrately tilted in your favour ;)

Current:
36859666_d9fbe299e5_o.jpg


Next Year 2007:
leadenhallbig04np4.jpg


Four years time:
nightlondon4yqpv4.jpg



(The last two piccies exclude the Canary Wharf cluster too! :eek: )
 
Looks like something out of a horror movie. You know one of those ones where you hallucinate and stuff. Wouldn't call them skyscrapers either, they are too small for that imo.

Also that nokia brick phone building is just totally vile and by far the worst of them all!
 
dbmzk1 said:
Looks like something out of a horror movie. You know one of those ones where you hallucinate and stuff. Wouldn't call them skyscrapers either, they are too small for that imo.

Also that nokia brick phone building is just totally vile and by far the worst of them all!
Click to expand...

Okay, I agree with the Nokia brick phone beer shaped building. It's vile.
But whoah! Hold your horses young one! They're not skyscrapers?
Jeese luoise.

Shard: London Bridge - 310m (More than 1000ft) which automatically makes it a "supertall" which is the largest of the largest skyscrapers you could ever get! I mean, by all means, without the spire it's TALLER than THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING! Yes, the current tallest in the US!

DIFA Tower - 288m (less than 1000ft) which makes it a skyscraper will be nearly as tall as the Chrysler Building in New York City!

Heron Tower - 242m. Compare this tower to anything else in the States and it would be TALL! Infact, if you put it in NYC it would be the 3rd tallest!

122 Leadenhall etc.....

I can go on and on. What isn't a skyscraper is anything less than 100m. They're mid/ground scrapers.

God knows where you got that from "they're not skyscrapers" :p
 
I don't think I would want London to compete with the likes of New York and HK with regard to its skyscrapers, and I don't think that's what we're after. These cities are dark and oppressive due to the sheer height and vicinity of its towers. I’ve recently been to Shanghai – vile place in my opinion, and only getting worse.

Dubai is a place I think London should be compared to; they design their tall structures sporadically, not in close proximity to one another. The Docklands and the City clusters are more than 5 miles apart.

London has far more to offer in its architecture as it is, with the likes of the Tower of London, Tower Bridge, Westminster Abbey, St Pauls (possibly the most beautiful building I've ever seen)... the list goes on. Historic buildings bring in the tourists, skyscrapers supply the office space.

I work in the City of London on Leadenhall St everyday, where most of these developments are planned/proposed - literally in the shadow of 30 St Mary's Axe, Lloyds and the new Willis Building. Very impressive structures.
However, my concern is the demand for such large office space. Swiss Re have just announced job cuts which will all but empty out St Mary's Axe, Tower 42 is only 3/4's occupied at this time.

Are we going to be left with a load of pretty towers which are only going to dilapidate in time due to them not being occupied?

I am excited by these developments, but a little concerned too.

Excellant thread by the way.
 
Last edited:
eXSBass said:
Okay, I agree with the Nokia brick phone beer shaped building. It's vile.
But whoah! Hold your horses young one! They're not skyscrapers?
Jeese luoise.

Shard: London Bridge - 310m (More than 1000ft) which automatically makes it a "supertall" which is the largest of the largest skyscrapers you could ever get! I mean, by all means, without the spire it's TALLER than THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING! Yes, the current tallest in the US!

DIFA Tower - 288m (less than 1000ft) which makes it a skyscraper will be nearly as tall as the Chrysler Building in New York City!

Heron Tower - 242m. Compare this tower to anything else in the States and it would be TALL! Infact, if you put it in NYC it would be the 3rd tallest!

122 Leadenhall etc.....

I can go on and on. What isn't a skyscraper is anything less than 100m. They're mid/ground scrapers.

God knows where you got that from "they're not skyscrapers" :p
Click to expand...
and then they all run face first into the burj, whihcs more than doubles thier size
 
eXSBass said:
Shard: London Bridge - 310m (More than 1000ft) which automatically makes it a "supertall" which is the largest of the largest skyscrapers you could ever get! I mean, by all means, without the spire it's TALLER than THE EMPIRE STATE BUILDING! Yes, the current tallest in the US!
Click to expand...


Did someone forget about the Sears Tower in Chicago??? :p
 
Last edited:
I work in the construction Industry and there is loads of work out there at the min if all these projects go ahead and with the olymipic projects and Heathrow T5 and reconstruction of T2 there will be a masive shortage of skilled tradesmen. Its hard enough now to get plumbers and electricians.
 
eXSBass said:
468320FenchurchStreet_pic4.jpg
Click to expand...

there all very nice buildings and most probably only have planning permission because of the architect invovled. But this one is HORRIBLE its completely over scaled for the surrounding buildings, places everything behind it in shadow and overcasts one of the greatest buildings in london the lloyds building
 
locutus12 said:
and Crossharbour,
177CrossharbourBuilding1(design2)_pic1.jpg


are a return to brutalism in architecture, possibly a very very bad idea.
Click to expand...


i dont see one brutalist building there to be honest. the above building is a modernist masterpiece, and a lot of the posted buildings are taking very strong influence from the great modernists in holland were all going super dutch
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom