London has awesome proposals in the pipeline, but thats just it, on a computer screen, all these high rises look ace, even those 2012 olympic city models look amazing - and they are mising many planned high rises. CW, city, southbank, vauxhall - it all looks very pretty, espec if ALL these turn into reality (Ive not seen a model/render of ALL current proposals-40+ at least, in one view).

However, turning virtual reality into real life seems to be a real struggle these days, I mean, is London a US/Asia heavy weight competing, skyscraper filled, future or just one big fantasy?

I am optimistic, or at least have been, but just reading through the threads and seeing very little real concrete change in the city now or the near future, it is starting to make me think twice - are we destined to have a wide, sparce void space - or will things really change? Not talking about the odd tower here or there, talking about an Asian style boom, wherby the 40 odd proposals we have turn into reality before the next century!!!!!

The next 5-10 years would be nice!

If we're talking a space of ten years then I do think so. Certain projects will fade away but each new project breaks something of a taboo, suddenly we're used to seeing renderings with a giant 1000ft tower. If that particular tower fails to be built, we'll see a another proposal filling the gap pretty soon.

Here in Singapore there is near constant talk in the academic and financial circles of the dominance of London, one article was labeled "the empire strikes back" ... not origional, but it captures a growing global awareness of London. Singapore always knew it was an important place, but now London is causing waves. Just ten years ago, Singapore, Malaysia and Hong Kong were talking of the end of London, the rise of the single currency and gradual fading of Britain ...

As such, I think we will see London with an asian style boom ... but without all the excitment + overt patriotism ... there'll be a constant corporate style rise of buildings, there'll be little government demands for a "1500ft tower to beat the world and show it that Britain's no.1!" ... but we may get there in a slow, rather dull, but truly British way. Then the world will wake up, hopefully the day before the 2012 olympics and go "wow, London rules!"

However, I fear London is getting too many 'modern' projects. As an architect I cannot really say such things as my peers will have me shot. But I love the Woolworth building in New York and anything of that style. If any of you get a chance, check out the competing designs for that building, all of them would look great in London. Plus that would allow us a street-level view in keeping with London. Instead of the horrible Spiral tower they're planning.

Such comments are almost considered treason by other architects. but I for one want to see a mix, a few modern skyscrapers, glass etc, but I would love more stone, and a play on Londons on neo-gothic and neo-classical style, then we can have a truly British skyscraper look, not something out of Asia or New York.

Ok, that's my two pence worth :D .... to answer the question, yes we will see a lot of these, maybe 70% + being built within 10 years.

do you think developers like spending millions and employing hundreds to develop buildings they have no intention of building? of course they dont. not everything will be built but its likely a lot will be. the problem is london has a massive construction pipe line and many developers, particularly residential ones have been needlessly cautious. those who have built have had spectacular success whether its barratt or ballymore. developments that havent sold well havent sold well because frankly they are crap. apparently st georges wharf starts marketing soon, wasnt it manuel who called up pretending to be an investor who got a start date? there's the london beetham tower, which assuming it gets approval will also be beginning soon, lets not forget heron and lbt :) london has 4 100m+ towers u/c at this very second, this time last year there were none. this total is bound to build up more as more and more of the projects in the pipeline come online. its hard to say when precisely everything will start but there's no reason by the end of 2007 we dont have the following, and this is being totally conservative and very realistic, u/c -
heron
beetham
lbt
st georges wharf
ill be totally shocked by the stupidity of developers if there isnt at least a dozen 100m+ residentials u/c in london too by the end of 2007.

i dont think the "spiral" tower is horrible, i agree though with the sentiment london is perhaps getting too many ultra techno buildings at the expense of other things. we need more that plays on the neo gothic and neo classical feel that the capital has but of course its all about money and who wants to pay for that detailing when they can just have shiny glass?

PJCCUK - I love the fact you are an architect and are prepared to commit treason against the establishment! When will decoration be allowed again??? It is getting farcical now. Take Lloyds and Swiss Re. Both are highly elaborate and loved for their flair. BUT the architects have gone to extreme lengths to explain away every twist, turn or change in material used as an essential functional design factor. Swiss-Re's gardens need not have spiraled and square floor plates are more popular with the (ignorant IMO) customers). The services on Lloyds did not have to be on the outside and would have been more fuel efficient in an internal core.

@ Danger 50,000 volts (Great name!) loads will get built don't worry. We can see plans for about 15 years ahead and yet even a major skyscraper from starting the core only takes 3 years to complete externally. So there will always be much more in planning than is being constructed. Lets not forget the big projects underway such as Wembley, CTRL, Heathrow.....Last year really was a gearing up compared to the previous 3 and I believe that will continue.

I've got to admit with Mr. Danger. I'd rather have a Chrysler/Empire State Building neo gothic look skyscraper rather than say DIFA. Not that DIFA is ugly, but the Neo Gothic style really suites London.


I believe America have that style, but are loosing it with thier glass clad buildings cropping up every week.


I would hate London's old architecture to be lost.

On top of all that, our 2nd and 3rd tallest went up in 2002 ( I may have the size orders slightly out) our 6th, 7th 8th, 9th in 2003 and the current u/c as mentioned. St.Georges, Heron and LBT all imminent with Beetham and Difa likely and all of them, at the top of this list. < HHmm.... I detect a definative trend here and all this happened adjacent to a financial slump!

London does not need height for the titles it already holds, but how much more so with them.

To answer your question, I think things are getting very exiting! I am very positive

Firstly I don't want hundreds of poor quality skyscrapers springing up all over London, and I prefer it when the proposals are looked at and not rushed through. It would be better if in 20 years time we end up with a dozen excellently designed (up to swiss re standard) built in suitable locations than 20 or 30 poor quality rushed skyscrapers. London doesn't need skyscrapers, it's a world class city even without them, but being a fan of them I would like to see more in The City of London and Canary Wharf particularly. Also Vauxhall is an interesting area.

I think we are going to see alot of the proposals or a good amount get approved over the coming months and years and with more and taller ones being proposed there will always be a demand for skyscrapers. I'd love to see alot more originality in the materials used, perhaps more stone and less glass as we see these days in cities all over the world. Let's have some quality and originality. Unfortunately I can't see that happening however.

When the Olympics get underway it will certainly help the property market and may help us get alot of new tall residentials which London seems to lack in somewhat. I'd like to see some more residential towers around the City of London.

I'm glad to hear from some of the experts in this field such a positive reponse, Goth I wouldn't imagine millions being spent on pipe dreams, if I lived in China that is!!! Fact is, millions is wasted on looooong planning applications, and reapplications, and court cases and PIs, etc!!! But I can see your point mate - after all things are getting started, albeit slowly! But thanks anyway chaps - I'm not a property developer, architect or town planner, I don't even live in London, jst a small country toon called sleaford, lincs! Its good to hear a positive outcome from the professionals.
I do believe myself that the modern proposals facing the city arn't a bad thing,
London is an evolving city, one of the worlds greatest, Roman, thru medieval, thru gothic, thru industrial revolution, the blitz, the docks decline - the citys best asset is its many faces. Chrysler was from the 30s, DIFA is in yer face 21st century ultra modern, you ask me, the city is looking in the right direction, forwrd. Radical though they may seem now, when your sat by your open fire smokin yer pipe, feedin yer grandkids worhters originals, DIFA will be the chrylser building, if you know what I mean - a classic symbol of London.
Im also surprised and pleased to hear London is big news in Asia, if theyre excited, then I definetly am.

Cheers guys.

I've got to admit with Mr. Danger. I'd rather have a Chrysler/Empire State Building neo gothic look skyscraper rather than say DIFA. Not that DIFA is ugly, but the Neo Gothic style really suites London.

I believe America have that style, but are loosing it with thier glass clad buildings cropping up every week.

I would hate London's old architecture to be lost.

Did you ever see a pic of the Corporation of London skyscraper proposed before the war? Was very much like you desired.

I think that Georgian terracing, neo classical and Victorian low rise blocks overlooked by church spires is more inkeeping to London than neo-gothic skyscrapers! Not sure why we would want to try and rebuild it now. I think Londons high quality modern tall building proposals (Canary Wharf is a bit of a anonomly as it by-passes the planning system) is working well with the current historical fabric.

The lightness of glass and current building technologies allows designers to build much more slight and graceful structures, the sort of effect that Wren got with his decorated stone spires. The 60s tower blocks and office blocks that dominate large sections of the wider skyline are a result of a one-off apocolyptic event, an unsympathetic approach to design and a naive rush to modernise on the cheap and can be all replaced if we desire.

Also what would the environmental implications be of building a ye olde skyscraper?

(Potto) Also what would the environmental implications be of building a ye olde skyscraper?

The pocks probably!

:lol:

In response to:

Are Londons skyscraper proposals just pipe dreams?


Well, news is just in (Summary Thread) Heron is getting its new proposal approved, which means taller and better. The good news? Enabling works Jan 2006, Construction 2007!

oh please, "enabling" works means squat.

If enabling works is not considered activity for the development then nothing else will.
How will you go straight to building a Skyscraper without enabling works eh? The journey needs to start somewhere. Enabling works is the start!

I love DIFA. I think we should have stone and other older materials etc, but i think they should take a more modern twist. Also i think they should have their own cluster, or at least not TOO many around the really modern ones we have now.

it could work well, older style towers, but it will have to be done carefully. Some art deco style would be nice.

Did you ever see a pic of the Corporation of London skyscraper proposed before the war? Was very much like you desired.

Never knew about this? How tall was it? Any pics?

And yeah I've always wanted and art-deco or neo-classical skyscraper in London. At the moment the only well designed glass buildings seem to be skyscrapers, but I'd still really like to see more stone.

Me too! I have a minor dream of a different reality and london has thirty odd Art Deco towers instead of 1.

I dont think they could ever be built now. To me, there is more to architecture than a design style: i.e: Stepped balustrades and vented Neo Georgian Windows..

Art Deco IS of its age and not retrievable..like memories..do you not think? There is the Bakerlite, the steel bound cabling, the chunky concrete that gets cancer, the social attitudes reflected in their dominance and newness and like my college (Senate House) it has history; a major scar..a corner missing due to a 500lb bomb dropped from 3 miles high by a duped young german in very different times!

I think it is great and inspirational to mimmick things that are remembered and worked wellin the past (just look at music.... all those DJ's, Sampling, dead peoples voices speeded up! ....and stuff)

Other than re-inventing, there is too much lost and that time is respectfully remembered, but it IS gone. I like new...its just getting so hard to think of new things.

I agree.....I would LOVE to see a new way of working with stone.

danger, i live in lincs too :)

Never knew about this? How tall was it? Any pics?

And yeah I've always wanted and art-deco or neo-classical skyscraper in London. At the moment the only well designed glass buildings seem to be skyscrapers, but I'd still really like to see more stone.

It was very tall compared to the surrounding, very monumental like the Empire State Building, would be interesting to know how far the project went, what the thoughts of the time were about it... I`ll try and find a pic, I think it was in that 'The London that never was' book so it`l be copyrighted

Ooh I have that book, I'll scan it tonight. There's also a fantasy London skyline in there I'll have a look.

The best 'never built' skyscraper in London was the Albert Memorial Tower in my opinion.

Check this out:-


http://tinypic.com/k4e888.jpg

I've never seen that before. It's absolutely incredible!
Perhaps one day many years in the future we could have it as a Phillip or an Elizabeth memorial. It looks like there's still space:
http://tinypic.com/k4fcyq.jpg

EH would no doubt say it will ruin the view of Big Ben...

What is the hight of the never built Albert Memorial Tower thanx?

It's listed on Gothic's website:
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/buildings.php?id=200

Notice the central tower on Westminster Abbey?

The original proposal (or one of them) for 1 Canada was pretty gothic from what i can recall - someone posted it here a while back.

That would have been very cool.

I think its probably a matter of cost, they could build some gothic style building similar to those in NY, but i suspect is much cheaper to build a glass/steel building.

Although its small, i quite like the detail on Portculis House, esp those chimneys and the roof.

The best 'never built' skyscraper in London was the Albert Memorial Tower in my opinion.

Check this out:-


http://tinypic.com/k4e888.jpg

Take note of the top of the tower and transfer it's fashion to the 'built' Albert Memorial in Hyde Park.

The original design in Hyde Park did not have a canopy, but Queen Victoria complained that without one "poor Alberts head would get wet" She was, after all, a fruitcake by that time! Gowd bless ya your ighness

Now that's very grand and a damn shame it wasn't built as you say. Can't see anything like that getting built these days.

The amazing thing with London is that it seems to have every style possible, and they all work in perfect harmony, like almost every aspect of London's culture/architecture/art/whatever there could possibly be with lots of variations, so why couldn't there be varying styles of tall building, with the ultra-modern DIFA, and some neo-gothic stuff nearby? The rendering for Freedom tower in NY shows how those styles can look great together, and sure, it'll sound risky, but im sure if you asked any architect to design some neo-gothic stuff and 'renderioded' it to fit the London 2012 skyline it would look very, very good.

Some more dreams that never materialised... will LBT be one of them?! look and weep ;)

Pictures are from the book London as it might have been (http://www.amazon.co.uk/exec/obidos/ASIN/0719555574/qid=1137346951/sr=8-2/ref=sr_8_xs_ap_i2_xgl/202-6044338-5979024) by Felix Barker and Ralph Hyde, the text is mine


http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/guildhall.jpg

this 500ft skyscraper would have stood directly behing the guildhall, which you can see in the foreground with cheapside running across the picture, Bank is to the right. Proposed 1944 (probably the War put paid to this)

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/law-courts1.jpg

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/law-courts2.jpg

One of the original designs for the Law Courts, see how the idea of building tall was around even in the Victorian times and how good it would have looked!


http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/st_pauls1.jpg

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/st_pauls2.jpg

Post War vision of St Pauls, see how the riverside complemented St Pauls and allowed for Wrens vision of the top section of St Pauls (and other chuch spires) to be viewed from all around. Look what we ended up with and what we are still building in what is the richest area of the UK... now only the dome section can be seen unhindered rising above the dross and the token height restriction (which does not equal to urban design no matter how much the City (and Westminister insists!). EH were always barking up the wrong tree with their PI over Swiss Re and Heron Tower


http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/british_museum.jpg

A similar idea for the Britsh Museum, some may prefer the intimate streets immediately opposite but you can not deny the incredible space that this would have provided. Compare this vision with the infill dross that we aquired during the 60s and 70s and managed to kill off this central area of london.

The original Britsh Library would have been located at the other end of this Vista... far better than the current location squeezed between the ugly hotel blocks of Euston road and over-shadowed by a railway station (St Pancras) like an unloved garage forecourt!

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/hammersmith.jpg

One of the great missed-oppurtunites of our time, again the fault of an incompetent and vision-less council, Rogers epic Hammersmith rebuild, easily on par with the confidence, technical grandeur and beauty of the Victorian era... look what we ended up with, a shite post modern dark and dingy shopping mall sat in the middle of a hellish gyratory ssytem... idiots!

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/stgeorges_circus.jpg

Southwark council doing a Hammersmith with the Bankside developments... As far back as the post war 40s they realised how this area of South of the River was part of central London and drew up plans accordingly... a grand park connected by beulevards... Rogers similar proposal was recently lost among the background noise of the NIMBYs



http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/liverpool_street.jpg

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/kingsX_airport.jpg

A couple of crazy visions for our Train stations... First a helipad above liverpool st station (proposed at the same time as the guildhall skyscraper)
and secondly an airport (?!) above Kings Cross proposed 1931, obviously planes were much slower and smaller then

^ Fascinating stuff... thanks for taking the time to post that.

Yeah, very good stuff!

Cheers for that insightful post Potto. I really like that 500ft skyscraper that would have stood directly behing the guildhall! Such a shame that councils can be so short sighted.

Amazing stuff...

Amazing stuff...

^ So amazing that you had to say it twice, lol.

Wow I'm really glad I saw those visions. Imagine what London might be like now had there not been WWII.

Imagine what London might be like now had there not been WWII.

Probably as dull as Paris.

Paris looks dull???

Yes when you compare it to the rich urban fabric of London.

Comon! You can´t say Paris is ugly??

its suburbs are, the parts it keeps out of its brochures and media coverage. And the parts it tried so hard to keep out of the eye of the olympic commitee. Great plan it was too.

But yes, the nice parts are indeed very nice.

Comon! You can´t say Paris is ugly??

I never did, I said it was dull. Paris is one of those cities that on a beauty scale would rank high, if you're into that kind of thing. It's unspoilt historical core never saw any of the hardship that London has faced over the centuries, and because of that has never achieved the dynamism and rich urban fabric that London has.

I walked along the Seine and managed to pinpoint every building along its banks and beyond, each a part of the same architectural 'style', that of grandoise, magnificient, flourishing ornament that was saying to me almost it had something to hide. As I gazed along the bank, I felt empty and rather bored at what I was seeing. No distinction in height, no buildings bouncing off each other nor excitement in the city's style or direction. It was painfully, dull.

I have walked along the South Bank a few hundred times by now. Each time I swear I see something new. A building I've missed, a spire I've never noticed before. One of Paris's attractions is the Pompidou Centre, seen as controversial and 'touristic' due to its architecture completely differing from everything around it. Parisian's hold its architectural style high as a tourist attraction in its own right. London has endless buildings like this, all woven into its dense, conflicting, buzzing, old lego brick upon new lego brick urban streets, and let the tourists decide for themselves what should be seen and what simply is a city staying ahead of the architectural game.

Walking the streets of London you notice how the city has rebuilt itself time and time again. As I said, it's like a plethora of lego, where the sets have been mixed up and blocks are all over the place. Brick, metal, steel, stone, glass, plastic all share this eclectic urban mix which excites the senses in every style possible, and this, especially in the City, enahnces the senses and gives the place a sense of going somewhere.

I never got anything like that with Paris. It's streets are samey, architecturally insipid, hostile to modernity and sensually, very, very dull.

All cities have their qualities....and lets face it...name 5 cities in the world (and for most of us that is all time and existence) Paris is in that 5. However, as I quoted before, there was a saying in the recent past :the view from Eiffel Tower is no view. Because a vast majority of the city is 6 or 7 0r 8 residential stories ( other than La Defence and and Sacre Ceur,etc) there appears to be nothing to see, and mostly, because it is all the same height.

London was considerably more physically scarred in WWII (lets not go there) and therefore we had more opportunity.

Paris is beautiful, but it is a different culture and the French see things differently in general. They dont need me to patronise them, because i do want to threaten my yearly visits.

The French have a grudging respect for 'modern London'. They see it as a half way house (in many ways) between the USA and Europe.

If that is uncomforable for them, I can understand that.

There has to be something special about Paris since so many people you ask: "what´s your favourite city?" answer: "Paris!". I admit thought that i have never seen any pics of modern buildings in Paris, are there any?

The pompidou Centre is the most famous, mainly because it is so modern compared to its surroundings. But even now it looks dated and of its time. London has similar buildings by the same architect, just as designed and modern, and these sit within London's tapestry without a thought.

http://www.pariskypictures.com/03/images/pompidou%20centre_03_m44.jpg

I was in Paris in Spring last year. I went to the top of that big tall tower that's in the middle of Paris, the one made of all the girders, I'm sure someone knows what its called but its name escapes me at the moment. ;)

Anyway, the thing I noticed looking across the city was the number of cranes visible. I could count them all on one hand. If you took in a view from that big round wheel near the Thames, you know the one, you'll see the city littered with them.

Tour Montparnasse - the black tower.

I think he might mean the Eiffel tower...girders.. but I could be wrong (?)

I was in Paris in Spring last year. I went to the top of that big tall tower that's in the middle of Paris, the one made of all the girders, I'm sure someone knows what its called but its name escapes me at the moment. ;)

Anyway, the thing I noticed looking across the city was the number of cranes visible. I could count them all on one hand. If you took in a view from that big round wheel near the Thames, you know the one, you'll see the city littered with them.

Very little gets built in London and still you say the city is littered with cranes? Got any examples of buildings all over the city that are u/c?

Not everything is tall you know suomi. London had 5 100m+ buildings begin last year, which isnt so bad. in the space of 2 to 9 skyscrapers in the space of 3 years. it will be 10 once Broadgate is comlete, and by then in 2008 You will see the real big boys U/C.

Very little gets built in London and still you say the city is littered with cranes? Got any examples of buildings all over the city that are u/c?

It is littered with cranes! Ive been here 4 years and there are always cranes everywhere! Londons building programme doesnt just consist of LBT and the Heron Tower! :bash:

Very little gets built in London and still you say the city is littered with cranes? Got any examples of buildings all over the city that are u/c?

Have you ever even been to London? It's crane city man, get a clue -

Oh and I wouldn't normally respond to an attack on my city but that one was done with a certain element of smugness that simply had to be quashed..

Very little gets built in London and still you say the city is littered with cranes? Got any examples of buildings all over the city that are u/c?
Visit London first then talk.

:) I don´t doubt your words but i´d like to know what´s u/c (low-rises) in London right now..

~10
http://img362.imageshack.us/img362/8404/londonpanorama1ut.jpg
~2
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/8783/thingscanonlygetbetter2xp.jpg
~5
http://img236.imageshack.us/img236/4114/sendtheangels5sj.jpg
~5
http://img226.imageshack.us/img226/5235/thebigpicture3dk.jpg

@SuomiPoika

London has absolutely masses of stuff under construction. There are cranes all over the place.

Here's just a selection:

Wembley Stadium (biggest football stadium on the planet)
Emirates Stadium
Heathrow Airport Terminal 5
Channel Tunnel Rail Link
White City
Elephant and Castle redevelopment
Broadgate Tower and 201 Bishopsgate
Pan Peninsula Tower
51 Lime Street
Pioneer Point North
Ontario Tower
Bankside 123
Palestra
More London
Tabard Square
St George's Wharf midrises
Royex House
Various other projects around Moorgate/Cheapside
31-39 Millharbour
Stock Exchange reclad

etc. etc...

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/law-courts1.jpg
whats the church next door? if someone can tell me i can measure and get an idea of the height of this building. is it st brides? also who is the architect for this and the guildhall building which incidentally was planned for bomb damaged land and only possible because of the war. it was post war planning regs that killed it.

About Paris.....

Now i happily project all the arguments, true and heartfelt, that London's urban fabric is full of vitality and is so vibrant because we allow ourselves to continuously challenge the accepted ways of living and doing business... always at a cost but always with a result that we consider to be much more exciting than if we idly accepted that we had everything we needed....


BUT... i dont know whether this may have been brought on by my recent stress levels.... as cities across the world yell and scream with their skyscrapers, many of them are totally overlooking the history and urban fabric that set paris and london apart from other cities.

But what i felt the most was that major cities across the world were simply building the same things.... skyscrapers..... for every cluster and 'downtown' created paris begins to look more and more unique and it's value as a city comfortable with itself keeps going higher and higher.

I find there are few big urban cities that have been built with the centralised flair that paris has and i dont see any cities emerging to challenge paris in that way.

Of course much of my observations apply to paris today and not necessarily to the reasons for why it emerged the way it is today.

------

Those missed opportunities in London are disgraceful, we seem to be continuously happy to eschew grand ambitions for a watered down equivalent. why?

http://xs63.xs.to/pics/06020/law-courts1.jpg
whats the church next door? if someone can tell me i can measure and get an idea of the height of this building. is it st brides? also who is the architect for this and the guildhall building which incidentally was planned for bomb damaged land and only possible because of the war. it was post war planning regs that killed it.

It must be St Clement Danes, wren worked on... it is still sat in the middle of the Strand surrounded by traffic!

http://www.touruk.co.uk/london_photos/stclement_danes.gif
http://www.touruk.co.uk/london_churches/stclementsdanes_church1.htm

"St Clement Danes derives its name from the earliest church to stand on the site, founded by descendants of the Danish invaders, whom Alfred the Great allowed to remain in London in the 9th century"

"The bells of St Clements Danes could be the ones mentioned in the nursery rhyme 'Oranges and Lemons' but although the bells play out the tune, St Clement's, Eastcheap, also designed by Wren, is more likely to be the church in the rhyme. The Eastcheap church is near the wharves where citrus fruit used to be unloaded"

@SuomiPoika

London has absolutely masses of stuff under construction. There are cranes all over the place.

Here's just a selection:

Wembley Stadium (biggest football stadium on the planet)
Emirates Stadium
Heathrow Airport Terminal 5
Channel Tunnel Rail Link
White City
Elephant and Castle redevelopment
Broadgate Tower and 201 Bishopsgate
Pan Peninsula Tower
51 Lime Street
Pioneer Point North
Ontario Tower
Bankside 123
Palestra
More London
Tabard Square
St George's Wharf midrises
Royex House
Various other projects around Moorgate/Cheapside
31-39 Millharbour
Stock Exchange reclad

etc. etc...:yes: There are loads of projects in the City that are not mentioned at all on these forums. They're not skyscrapers but they're certainly big buildings. there'a big building UC at the end of my street. Again it's not a skyscraper but it's damn big!

Very little gets built in London and still you say the city is littered with cranes? Got any examples of buildings all over the city that are u/c?

And living in Finland you'll be able to see all these 'non-existent cranes' won't you, god I wish I had such a great view, shame, in London you dont get views of the city with no cranes.....

There really should be a :dickhead: smiley shouldnt there

London really is an Ugly city, god even New York has an elegance and style, listening to tourists around the city the word that always crops up again and again is that Londons looking like a "Third world country" thilthy TAcKY, and crime ridden as for these so skyscrap[ers being built i'll bet money LBT, is a gonna along with our eceonomy.

London really is an Ugly city, god even New York has an elegance and style, listening to tourists around the city the word that always crops up again and again is that Londons looking like a "Third world country" thilthy TAcKY, and crime ridden as for these so skyscrap[ers being built i'll bet money LBT, is a gonna along with our eceonomy.

LBT aint a gonna, bitch. It is gonna start next year wether cunts like u want it to or not. The economy is increasing and u cant stop it. now go fuck off to some other country, fucker.

"And living in Finland you'll be able to see all these 'non-existent cranes' won't you, god I wish I had such a great view, shame, in London you dont get views of the city with no cranes...."

You´re a complete idiot!

And newcastle, try to calm down:)

London really is an Ugly city, god even New York has an elegance and style, listening to tourists around the city the word that always crops up again and again is that Londons looking like a "Third world country" thilthy TAcKY, and crime ridden as for these so skyscrap[ers being built i'll bet money LBT, is a gonna along with our eceonomy.

Livestock wandering about eating left overs covering dust tracks, concrete structures rising to unfinshed floors with steel reinforcers poking the sky, shanty huts made of corregated sheets squeezed into every nook and cranny. Look, there's a well over there to provide us with our daily water, always power cuts affecting the few who are privallaged to be hooked up to the grid, maybe civil war will break out again, who knows but at least there is now an internet cafe where i can spend my days wages reading stupid comments from brainless individuals living on the other side of the world...

London has absolutely masses of stuff under construction. There are cranes all over the place.

Here's just a selection:

....
Elephant and Castle redevelopment
....

There's even the Kidbrooke Regeneration that can match/ top the Elephant & Castle Regeneration.

It will cost £750million ($1.3billion), and 6,000 1970s style flats and houses will be demolished, with over 4,000 new homes being created, as well as parks and transport links.

http://www.greenwich.gov.uk/Greenwich/News/LatestNews/DeveloperChosenForKidbrookeMasterplan.htm

http://www.greenwich.gov.uk/NR/rdonlyres/89B3CA7B-A9B4-4704-87F5-B16977707846/0/kidbrookeview.jpg

I didnt realise that was at Greenwich, should be good the whole Thames Gateway needs a change

You´re a complete idiot!

how does that work out? Someone who speaks his mind is an idiot, while someone sitting at a computer making completely wrong remarks isnt?

London really is an Ugly city, god even New York has an elegance and style, listening to tourists around the city the word that always crops up again and again is that Londons looking like a "Third world country" thilthy TAcKY, and crime ridden as for these so skyscrap[ers being built i'll bet money LBT, is a gonna along with our eceonomy.

I'm new to this forum, but i've spent quite a few months just browsing posts. This is by far the most ridiculous post i have ever seen. Ever.

I'm fairly convinced it's just meant to be a wind up though.

The Pompidou Centre looks like a multi-storey car park.

London really is an Ugly city, god even New York has an elegance and style, listening to tourists around the city the word that always crops up again and again is that Londons looking like a "Third world country" thilthy TAcKY, and crime ridden as for these so skyscrap[ers being built i'll bet money LBT, is a gonna along with our eceonomy.

Please be gentle with him...this man has other issues that are unrelated to skyscrapers or cities. To hate your own capital and to slur it in this way (which could not be true, as most foreign visitors are re-visitors) may be symtomatic of something much more serious....

London really is an Ugly city, god even New York has an elegance and style, listening to tourists around the city the word that always crops up again and again is that Londons looking like a "Third world country" thilthy TAcKY, and crime ridden as for these so skyscrap[ers being built i'll bet money LBT, is a gonna along with our eceonomy.
What a retarded post.

Not only is what you've said complete bollocks, it's also written in the style of an autistic 3 year old.

[QUOTE=Monkey]:yes: There are loads of projects in the City that are not mentioned at all on these forums. ... QUOTE]

and this fresh one: Chelsea are reportedly interested in buying Earls Court Exhibition Centre in a £400m deal so they can build a new 65,000-seater to replace Stamford Bridge.

What a retarded post.

Not only is what you've said complete bollocks, it's also written in the style of an autistic 3 year old.

:rofl:

@Jef. Just heard on Sky Sports News that Earls Court Exhibition PLC or whatever they are called dont want to sell (reading between the lines).

They said 'We want to make sure that whatever happens the future of Earls Court as an exhibition and conference centre remains intact' Or someting along those lines

Chelsea FC ant a 65000 seater, wow!

Well one things for sure, as far as sport stadiums go, London will be the world no.1 by light years.

yeah definitely, as long as Chelsea can find somewhere, it doesnt look like Stamford Bridge can be re-developed easily without loads of negociations, its just much better to start with a blank canvas and have all the21st century stuff all over the stadium, not just at the new bits in my opinion

What about near Battersea?

there are loads of places, just a question of whether they go for them or not

sell stamford bridge to fulham ;) easy :D

I think they want to remain within spitting distance of Chelsea or at least in the Borough, as Earls Court is.