London Skyline 2012 (and beyond)
Sorry for all those how have no interest in geeky things such as skyscrapers but I've got a FETISH for URBAN DEVELOPMENT
Anyway I stumbled upon these images, the first being a shot of London today and the second a prototype of London in 2012.
What do you THINK - nice enough to invite the world into our homes for the Olympics? Let's face it, the current skyline isn't very impressive so change is good...
Oh no I love stuff like this... These are the suppossed future looks for the City...
FUTURAMA!
I'd hoped some of those council blocks would have been knocked down by then
Well there's hope - they're getting rid of the shitty 60s office blocks in the city at an ASTOUNDING rate. It's fantastic. Everywhere you go they're putting up screens around huge buildings and within six months thev've completely transformed it - they gut it from the inside and then build around the foundations with metal and glass. It's very clever.Originally Posted by Madison
I'd hoped some of those council blocks would have been knocked down by then
Not sure if I like the GAP in the middle... Can't they demolish the Bank of England or something... We have to resign ourselves to the fact the future is UP...
I like them but they're too WIDE
So Vauxhall is being built up as well? I know Canary Wharf is gonna be... We'll have TOO MANY economic centres... ALMOST
They're trying to stretch Canary Wharf along the Isle of Dogs right to the coast to create the longest stretch of commercial development outside of China.... they haven't cleared it yet but they probably will
The main problem is getting clearance for all those fancy glass buildings with the funny names in the City. The local busy bodies are kicking up a fuss saying it will "destroy the skyline"
As though the current one looks better!
So far they're being so vocal that they can't start construction until the complaints go away. VERY annoying. Everyone said the Gerkin was a mistake, now it's one of the most iconic buildings in the country.
I can't understand the geography of London. It's HUGE.
I saw a lot of demolition when I was at Waterloo last year. Let's just hope all the new skyscrapers don't date awfully...
to me, that first picture from funky looks fine, a nice panoramic view, though I can't work out where it was taken from in London (ie which part of London). I assume it's south of the river - but I could be wrong...
yup. Forest Hill apparently.
All the more skyscrapers for the terrorists to destroy.
I'm sure you're only joking, but I've heard that view before and hate it. Talk about being lead but what a bunch of extremists want... If we did that then they wouldn't be rebuilding the WTC
I'm joking yes.
I'm not the only person thinking that then.
Do we actually NEED all these extra buildings? I mean isn't only 40% of Canary Wharf actually occupied anyway?
Top up, Sue?
This is probably true but it's not unusual - buildings as big as the ones in Canary Wharf tend to get taken over by one large corporate company and they buy/rent the space for themselves, with the view that they will eventually expand. A lot cheaper long term than having to move 4000 people into a big building in 5 years
My company owns the entire 9 floors of the Hammersmith roundabout and about three of the floors are half empty. It's just the way it is, doesn't mean other companies don't want skyscrapers of their own
London has become the gateway between North America and Europe/Middle East - and with China and India coming on board the demand is only likely to increase. It's the main reason why our economy continues to boom in the face of global uncertainty...
Oh and that curly building in particular is SENSATIONAL
They'd BETTER build THAT
Wait till you see pictures from Beijing next year. Skyscraper certainly isn't a word in THEIR dictionaries
Nothing to see here MOVE ALONG.
And what's that London Bridge tower? I don't recall that one. 310m would easily make it the tallest in the country. I mean Empire State is 380m...
The Shard I think?
Here's the current state of play
Last edited by Madison; 18-07-2007 at 05:25 PM.
i like that one.
That's the ONLY ONE I knew for sure... I thought that was already on the way...
Looks awful. I hate the way that London & Berlin knock up ugly modern buildings right in among the great historical ones , those office blocks around the Tower of London area ruin it. At least some European cities confine the monstrosities to their own area.
Yeah let's just keep it JUST the way it is.
WHAT WOULD CHRISTOPHER WREN SAY?
You're pretty small minded if you let a tall building in the vicinity of the Tower of London distract you.
Well, in this overcrowded world the future are high buildings!
Or would you prefer HUGE cities with very small, oldfashioned buildings? Without nature at all? Me not.
And I wouldn't call them ugly at all. Some buildings might be ugly, but most of them are really exciting. So impressive.
I also love the mix of old and new. It makes the old buildings even nicer in some cases. The Potsdamer Platz has got an very old building inbetween. Love that mix. The old building would be one of many old buildings in Berlin, if it wasn't inbetween those buildings. It's just lovely.
I'm very lucky for London and love those pics. I thought London would have problems with space. I'm glad that London found ways to build up a cool skyline for the future.
Yes, yes, I know. My english isn't the best!
Modern buildings and historical ones can look GREAT next to each other. The problem London has had is that a lot of the modern ones (particularly 60s & 70s) have just been plain ugly. It's the fact that they are ugly that is the problem, not the fact that they are 'modern'.
With the right architects and innovative building, there's absolutely no reason why the London skyline shouldn't look sensational.
Not sure. I do know they've just gutted a MASSIVE hole in both Holborn and Euston Road... so I guess work has started on some of them
Last edited by funky; 18-07-2007 at 05:25 PM.
And according to some web pages the Shard (London Bridge) tower would make it the tallest in Europe. With 66 floors. Woo!
I see Seb is of the opinion of those that are preventing the start of some of other buildings...
I don't get it. London is severely behind some of its peers around the world. Paris has a huge commercial district on the outskirts of the city and Madrid is growing rapidly. Sydney and New York have been way ahead for decades. And there are numerous cities in India and China that have already passed it in only a couple of years' development...
WE NEED SKYSCRAPERS. And some of the ones planned are the most amazing looking I've seen globally. As I've said, The Gerkin is not an ugly building and that is surrounded by classic gothic buildings in Liverpool Street. It is modern and it has loads of character.
What is more important is getting rid of those dreadful 60s concrete monstrosities (as they're finally doing) and as Ag said, making sure the new ones don't date quickly...
Well you and I are never going to agree on modern skyscrapers since you love them & I detest them. I find nothing aesthetically pleasing in them at all, at least Paris has its modern commercial area separate to the rest of the city which is ok. I'd say any buildings in the centre of London should conform to the cultural heritage of the city and not be led by crude economic concerns. Berlin is even worse than London; half ugly communist barrack things & half ugly new modernist things with only the area around the Unter Den Linden & Brandenburg Gate ok.
That's not how they built in the past, so do we stop moving on NOW, just so they all look like classical architecture? As you well know London has space for these things as QUITE A LOT OF IT was wiped out 60 years ago...
I'm not interested in the politics of unrestrained economic growth anyway however with architecture it should certainly not be the main concern. Putting modern skyscrapers in the midst of London's great historical buildings changes the character of the city. Not as bad as when the Russians destroyed a large part of medieval Moscow in the 1960s to build the ugliest hotel in the world but getting there.....
Well thank god politicians and decision makers are.
What a LOAD of BOLLOCKS. London has always developed and changed and moved on. I mean the last 100/200/500/1,000 years were no different, so WHY stop now? It's not like we're demolishing the Tower of London for a skyscraper...
NO.
I've stayed in that. Got lost in it too.
Top up, Sue?
Crude economic concerns is London's heritage. It shaped the world more than Shakespeare ever did.
I consider, that you commit an error. Write to me in PM.
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
