It's a common mistake which keeps appearing again and again on all the news websites. If only they did a little research (a 30 second search on Google...) they'd find there are actually several towers higher than LBT being planned in Europe.

London Skyscrapers: so much talking and so little action:bash: :bash: Another misinformed post..i dont think you have a clue what you are prattling on about!!

Tall Buildings Under Construction in London.:cheers:

1.City Of London....Broadgate Tower:165m

2.City Of London...Willis Building:125m

3.City Of London....122 Leadenhall:225m

4.City Of London...100 Middlesex St:105m

5.City Of London...Ropemaker Place:96m

6.Docklands...Pan Peninsula Tower1: 147m

7.Docklands...Pan peninsula Tower2: 122m

8.Docklands..22 Marsh Wall Tower 1:140m

9.Docklands..22 Marsh Wall tower2:98m

10.Docklands..Riverside South Tower1: 236m

11.Docklands..Riverside South Tower2: 189m

12.Docklands..Arrowhead Quay: 114m

13.Docklands...Cross Harbour Tower: 131m

Buildings Awiting construction pahse and current buildings being demolished:

14.City Of London: Heron Tower:242m

15.City Of London: Broadgate tower:288m

Also numerous midrise buildings U/c ..not bad for a place hwhich is all talk and no action as you dribbled.:bash:

hmmm moscows russia and russia is more asian then europe.

have you had any education before??? moscow been and always be in europe !

15.City Of London: Broadgate tower:288m

Also numerous midrise buildings U/c ..not bad for a place hwhich is all talk and no action as you dribbled.:bash:

You mean Bishopsgate tower, not Broadgate tower.

The reduced copy of a tower Russia, but as a whole it is quite good

it does take ages 4 a tall building to be built due to all the historicness of london...frustrating but with out it we would loose toristes...

I love this building , is so futuristic.
But altius is right too many renders an so little actions.
The others buldings have not so much renders but they are under construction...
However, nice talls, for all the projects you listed greenwich, for me bishop tower is a supertall not a midrise.

The reduced copy of a tower Russia, but as a whole it is quite good


Copy? I hardly call it that considering this has been proposed/approved since 2002 way before the Foster redesign came into fruition. It's the Russia tower's design from Norman Foster, a fellow Brit himself who 'copied' this design.

The reduced copy of a tower Russia, but as a whole it is quite good

Em... What?

This tower was around LONG before the new incarnation of the tower of Russia.

The Tower of Russia is a stretched copy of London Bridge Tower going by your logic, so get your facts right.

The others buldings have not so much renders but they are under construction...

I actually find of all the really tall towers in London, it is the Shard that has the least renders.

Another misinformed post..i dont think you have a clue what you are prattling on about!!

Tall Buildings Under Construction in London.:cheers:

1.City Of London....Broadgate Tower:165m

2.City Of London...Willis Building:125m

3.City Of London....122 Leadenhall:225m

4.City Of London...100 Middlesex St:105m

5.City Of London...Ropemaker Place:96m

6.Docklands...Pan Peninsula Tower1: 147m

7.Docklands...Pan peninsula Tower2: 122m

8.Docklands..22 Marsh Wall Tower 1:140m

9.Docklands..22 Marsh Wall tower2:98m

10.Docklands..Riverside South Tower1: 236m

11.Docklands..Riverside South Tower2: 189m

12.Docklands..Arrowhead Quay: 114m

13.Docklands...Cross Harbour Tower: 131m

Buildings Awiting construction pahse and current buildings being demolished:

14.City Of London: Heron Tower:242m

15.City Of London: Broadgate tower:288m

Also numerous midrise buildings U/c ..not bad for a place hwhich is all talk and no action as you dribbled.:bash:


thanks for posting that list

Another misinformed post..i dont think you have a clue what you are prattling on about!!

Tall Buildings Under Construction in London.:cheers:

1.City Of London....Broadgate Tower:165m

2.City Of London...Willis Building:125m

3.City Of London....122 Leadenhall:225m

4.City Of London...100 Middlesex St:105m

5.City Of London...Ropemaker Place:96m

6.Docklands...Pan Peninsula Tower1: 147m

7.Docklands...Pan peninsula Tower2: 122m

8.Docklands..22 Marsh Wall Tower 1:140m

9.Docklands..22 Marsh Wall tower2:98m

10.Docklands..Riverside South Tower1: 236m

11.Docklands..Riverside South Tower2: 189m

12.Docklands..Arrowhead Quay: 114m

13.Docklands...Cross Harbour Tower: 131m

Buildings Awiting construction pahse and current buildings being demolished:

14.City Of London: Heron Tower:242m

15.City Of London: Broadgate tower:288m

Also numerous midrise buildings U/c ..not bad for a place hwhich is all talk and no action as you dribbled.:bash:

City Of London...Willis Building:125m is already done..and leadenhall is not under construction yet

It is an impressive list anyway.

Great design, this is something London should have. Go red coats!

Brilliant tower. Best design I've seen for a long while and a perfect location to match. I just hope all of Londons upcoming skyscrapers are this beautiful over the coming years and inevitable high-rise boom. I'd hate to see the face of our city scarred by over eager development.

I'll be referring to this building as the Shahd from here on out.

New rendering

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u50/ah786/babygem.jpg

Nice one

that a nice angle also for this fantastic tower...glass with an old church in front...great! :)

that a nice angle also for this fantastic tower...glass with an old church in front...great! :)

Its actually a Cathedral (if quite a puny one) = Southwark Cathedral

Considering London is such an extremely rich city, i'm suprised there isn't more supertalls like this there?

Considering London is such an extremely rich city, i'm suprised there isn't more supertalls like this there?


It's not that, it's that alot of people didn't want skyscrapers in the city.

There are very few locations where supertalls could be built in London. Frankly I'm amazed LBT got through the planning process - there are height limits everywhere, along with protected views, historic areas, and a whole army of NIMBY's, politicians, journalists and heritage groups who do their utmost to oppose anything tall. Then you have the enormous project costs, which can run into hundreds of millions. Also, it's easier to find tenants for the shorter buildings, as most corporations in the City prefer large floorplates. For developers, it's just too difficult, too risky and too expensive. I think LBT is a "one off", and after it's built we won't see another supertall for decades.

Its actually a Cathedral (if quite a puny one) = Southwark Cathedral

<offtopic> I should have know it also that it was a cathedral since I walked passed it last year ;)

@wjfox: You could be right but on the other hand it also could be the first of...I mean maybe people will see, that after this gem is finished, that super tall buildings don't have the ruin thing concerning views etc for the city....who know's let see after this one if finished (which still is a few year away...)

Strange, the rendering looks like that tallest hotel in north korea

^please please please dont start that again

Wow! That is sexy tower! Go London! :banana:

the new rendering looks awesome!! :eek2:

New rendering

http://i165.photobucket.com/albums/u50/ah786/babygem.jpg

The crown could look a bit awkward since it's so huge. It looks to be a quarter of the building's total height.

I agree. It's way too much without floor inside. Quite a cheap trick to get the offical height increased if you ask me. But well, it IS part of the silouhette and structure, and at least it's no darn spire!!
(follow my trail of thoughts concerning NY)

They are plant and radiator floors - essential to the ventilation and environmental control of the building.

Here's the complete floor layout:


http://i17.tinypic.com/52ocinc.jpg

Yeah but mate, if you built something 300m tall, you might as well make it accessible all the way upthere! Wether it's a public observation floor or a private pool is another issue but using the highest part of it for stocking brooms and buckets... Na....
Don't get me wrong, I like this tower but they could easily improve it, I'm sure.

Yeah but mate, if you built something 300m tall, you might as well make it accessible all the way upthere! Wether it's a public observation floor or a private pool is another issue but using the highest part of it for stocking brooms and buckets... Na....
Don't get me wrong, I like this tower but they could easily improve it, I'm sure.

I'm trying my hardest not to be nasty here but... brooms and buckets? Are you stupid? Or just stupid where architecture is concerned?

You put mops and buckets in the mop cupboard. Not in 20 very important plant floors, that keep the building 'working' by providing electricity etc... etc...

The plant floors of this building are tied into the design brilliantly. it gives the impression of the tower dissapearing into the sky. How about you go and learn something about buildings before you make such ignorant statements?

the last render is awesome, the building have a nice desing

Fantastic new renders. I'm very much looking forward to this thing gracing London's skyline.

http://i17.tinypic.com/52ocinc.jpg

it looks like crystal ice...nice rendering....

god damn i love this scraper but i just wish this would hurry up it's delay after delay.Do they have funding now or not

London desperalety needs more new towers. This is great news, and the design is very nice. This tower isn't what it normally is, boxy.

London desperalety needs more new towers.

Desperately? There are many methods to make a city better, and towers are certainly not a requirement. I do like this tower, however. Unlike most, I'm not a fan of clusters (church spires never stood in clusters) so I'm glad this will stand alone. It looks great in the 20 Fenchurch garden video.

don't like it. don't like the form...but there is something atracctive about it... jajajaj

it looks very intersting in the top of the tower but and it looks very hi-tech

this tower will be fantastic when built. Cant wait for more to go up.Its a shame that the height was reduced down to 300metres

is there anymore tall towers planned for canary whalf

There are currently 7 150m+ skyscrapers planned or under construction for Canary Wharf, including a new tallest at 236m, and 11 more towers in the 100m-150m range.

That should be discussed in the Project Summary Thread, not here. Go there for more information.

They are plant and radiator floors - essential to the ventilation and environmental control of the building.

Here's the complete floor layout:


http://i17.tinypic.com/52ocinc.jpg

i love this

the building looks massive !

To like me this project! Very good form. This best that can be thought up for London

thanks for the update on what going up at the whalf

http://www.shardlondonbridge.com/images/timeline/development_programme.gif

New construction schedule. Demolition starts in a matter of months (work already underway on site) and construction begins in May 2008:)

So close now...

I sware this buiding should be u/c by now? If not take it off.

How the hell are you supposed to start construction on a building when the tenants of the current building are JUST starting to leave. They have been holding up in there for years, and are only finally getting out now, after being bought out of the building by the consortium. This isn't Dubai, tallbuildings take time to go up. Have some bloody patience.

They are plant and radiator floors - essential to the ventilation and environmental control of the building.

Here's the complete floor layout:


http://i17.tinypic.com/52ocinc.jpg

Brilliant pic, You should edit your post on the First page and put it in there mate.

Foster in amazing. Sydney is lucky now to have 3 Foster towers.
The 151m/50st Lumiere is nearing compeltion right across from Town hall.
pic>

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1107/947071618_d6ca8f2793_b.jpg

the top penthouses are all glass.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1395/782095707_831f4f85fc_b.jpg
btw, the shard looks excellent

How the hell are you supposed to start construction on a building when the tenants of the current building are JUST starting to leave. They have been holding up in there for years, and are only finally getting out now, after being bought out of the building by the consortium. This isn't Dubai, tallbuildings take time to go up. Have some bloody patience.

Well this bloody thread is for skyscrapers which are u/c or in pealing stages not which will be built in bloody million years time and how long os this been going for. dont be so assy.

I'm just telling it like it is mate.

This section is for buildings that are PLANNED or U/C over 300m tall. Demolition is starting soon, construction begins early next year. If you think that is 'a million years time' then I think you may need your head checked.

Where do you suggest it goes for god sakes? If this thread wasn't in the world section then we wouldn't be able to keep the people updated who don't want to go to the UK forums.

If you don't like that it's here, ignore it, don't come in and bitch about something so easily avoided:lol:

Foster in amazing. Sydney is lucky now to have 3 Foster towers.

Foster?

:lol: Well this bloody thread is for skyscrapers which are u/c or in pealing stages not which will be built in bloody million years time and how long os this been going for. dont be so assy.:lol:

Foster in amazing. Sydney is lucky now to have 3 Foster towers.


Foster is great indeed! But don't you think Renzo Piano can be amazing too, from time to time?

I cant imagine what a supertal would be like in such a Historical lowrise city such as London. Even the current Highrises dont really seem to suit the landscape of the city. Hopefully this will fit in.

Hey, could someone tell me how is that structure made of? Concrete or steel? Or just a mix? :)

How the hell are you supposed to start construction on a building when the tenants of the current building are JUST starting to leave. They have been holding up in there for years, and are only finally getting out now, after being bought out of the building by the consortium. This isn't Dubai, tallbuildings take time to go up. Have some bloody patience.

Calm down man, he was just wondering (after all previous timetables have stated construction should have started)
And there is only so much patience we can have, it's been years and years and years since this was approved, let alone proposed.

Sorry but it gets a bit annoying when people come along making silly demands like 'take it off'. We, hell even the developers can't help the fact that this project has faced so many delays. Now something is actually happening and the mood regarding this project should be better, not bought down with comments like that. What I posted was actually good news. Shows they are working to get this going as fast as possible.

Hey, could someone tell me how is that structure made of? Concrete or steel? Or just a mix? :)

Concrete core, steel frame, triple-layer glass cladding.


http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b387/wjfox2005/proj_LBT_06.gif

I have been patient with this building and will continue to be so as this building is worth the wait.Anyway things are progressing now as newcastle guy has said.This will be 310m of pure :banana:

The crane is now going up. Demolition is just around the corner!

Keltbray have the £8m contract to demolish Southwark Towers and as anticipated they have been busy building the base for a Wolff tower crane to be used for the demolition.

This one can definitely be changed from 'App' to 'Demo'.

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/cranesetcphotos/shard7.jpg

Big thanks to Cranesetc:)

how is the crane secured to ground.

what does demo mean?

how is the crane secured to ground.

Piles installed earlier:

http://mysite.wanadoo-members.co.uk/cranesetcphotos/shard6.jpg

...and the whole process begins. Thanks Cranesetc :okay:

nice building

welcome SeViNiYo!!
please do not post the same things over and over.

Foster in amazing. Sydney is lucky now to have 3 Foster towers.
The 151m/50st Lumiere is nearing compeltion right across from Town hall.
pic>

http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1107/947071618_d6ca8f2793_b.jpg

the top penthouses are all glass.
http://farm2.static.flickr.com/1395/782095707_831f4f85fc_b.jpg
btw, the shard looks excellentYeah, we do but this is a Renzo Piano.

I can't wait to finally see work begin! I'm so excited! :D

It may not be the tallest building in the world, but it will certainly be one of the most beautiful/well situated and most talked about towers for a long time to come. Fantastic.

thanks for the crane info.

I say all us London forumers go down to the site and do some good old fashioned scowling through the fence, - if that doesn't speed up progress I don't know what will. >(

Seriously, I can't wait to see this tower in person! The heat regulation system with the plants is clever too, very similar to that in the Gherkin. Good to see innovations in interior design as well as the exterior. :cheers:

i agree it needs to start soon.

This will be one of Europes finest scrapers, if not the worlds

it is definitely a great skycraper but the finest in the world not for me :)

This will be a high quality standard modern supertall though, I've found that most of London's highrise projects never fail to disappoint and have to be of the best quality in the world, eg: The Gherkin, 122LH, Bishopsgate Tower and the Shard.

^^ True, I think it's because they have to go through so much to be built, a certain level of quality is guaranteed.

yep , we can all live with the duration as long as a special building is the end result.thank the lord it's not going through ruth kelly anymore:weird:

This will be a high quality standard modern supertall though, I've found that most of London's highrise projects never fail to disappoint and have to be of the best quality in the world, eg: The Gherkin, 122LH, Bishopsgate Tower and the Shard.

Never fail to dissapoint? Seriously?

it is definitely a great skycraper but the finest in the world not for me :)

Certainly one of the best in Europe though. (But then again when it comes to supertalls there is still very little competition that is up to scratch in Europe, I think we all need to get a move on to catch up lol)

IMO it will be one of the best in the world, but not just because of the design, but for where and what it is. It will totally change the look of London.

yep , we can all live with the duration as long as a special building is the end result.thank the lord it's not going through ruth kelly anymore:weird:

This was never going through Ruth Kelly (thank god). That was 20 Fenchurch Street.

[QUOTE=Newcastle Guy;14641130]Never fail to dissapoint? Seriously?

I was meant to say that the capitals highrise projects having an oozing quality to them, I find even the less impressive projects have a quality feel to them. If i misworded the sentence I apologise ;)

Never fail to dissapoint? Seriously?

I was meant to say that the capitals highrise projects having an oozing quality to them, I find even the less impressive projects have a quality feel to them. If i misworded the sentence I apologise ;)

Oh, OK. I'm Sorry:)

I thought you may have misworded actually, that's why I didn't start a debate on the issue:)

The Shard Is One Of The Best Buildings Ever
I Think !!!
Dont You

i agree it will be awsome when its built, but not tall enough.

i agree it will be awsome when its built, but not tall enough.

It is tall enough for London. And that's all that matters.

Yep. The bigger version can be admired in Moscow soon.

wasnt the proposed height taller about 1500ft but locals complained .

This will be one of Europes finest scrapers, if not the worlds

Slow down! :crazy:
Look at the Spire (two times higher and in my eyes more interesting), Waterview Tower, Moscow Tower...
Maybe the finest and most exiting building in Europe, if you don't count Russia to Europe..., but never the most in the whole world!
But a nice desgin though!!

But for me, nothing ever will be more beautiful and organic than Swiss Re...! Anywhere

Slow down! :crazy:
Look at the Spire (two times higher and in my eyes more interesting), Waterview Tower, Moscow Tower...
Maybe the finest and most exiting building in Europe, if you don't count Russia to Europe..., but never the most in the whole world!
But a nice desgin though!!

Oh now, the Moscow tower is just the Shard on steroids.

Oh now, the Moscow tower is just the Shard on steroids.
Oh now, the Shard is just Russia Tower suffering from impotence ;)

Oh now, the Shard is just Russia Tower suffering from impotence ;)

I shall not sink to your level...hmmph *written quivering with rage*

:jk: ;)

and anyway, excessive steroid use can lead to impotence. :wink2:

yeah- I know, kinda gone off topic. The metaphor died long ago.

the russia tower does not for example have low iron crystal clear glass planned for it which is one of the most expensive types of cladding you can get. this is the sort of glass they put on the front of a tv screen or make goblets from, it has high resistance to oxidation, brilliant tensile strength and uniform porosity. it will literally be clad from tip to toe in the same glass you make chandeliers out of!

people should be aware that the budget for london bridge tower is £1.2 billion. thats $2.5 billion dollars. it will be the most expensive skyscraper *ever* built anywhere.

anyone who frankly thinks the russia tower will compare to this in anything more than height has little idea of the detail of the designs of both buildings and the m/e and structural engineering within.

the very top crop of london towers coming along - leadenhall, bishopsgate, and this are totally peerless in the sheer quality being used in building them. you can already see that quality with the willis building and swiss re for yourself and it is nothing less than you would expect for what is the single richest place on the planet. these are what billion dollar buildings look like...

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/78WillisBuilding_pic26.jpg

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images/pics/5830StMarysAxe_pic23.jpg

people around the world can build whatever the hell they want, they can make them as tall as they want. i dont care. i want buildings designed and built that have a design life of hundreds of years without having to replace the glass like london bridge tower does. you can build a hundred russia towers or poxy supertall apartment blocks in dubai or chicago but you'll never come close to the build quality on these - you cant afford it in those buildings anyway as that market doesnt exist there which can pay those headline rents - so i'll take our design quality over your cock comparisons any day of the week.

woah... easy on there fella.

^^ wow, great work of art.... incredible!

:lol: Nice rant.

:lol: Nice comeback :lol: Nah, I don't blame you mate. Afterall, you can't argue with the truth.

Edit: Eh? My reply is before his post?

people around the world can build whatever the hell they want, they can make them as tall as they want. i dont care. i want buildings designed and built that have a design life of hundreds of years without having to replace the glass like london bridge tower does. you can build a hundred russia towers or poxy supertall apartment blocks in dubai or chicago but you'll never come close to the build quality on these - you cant afford it in those buildings anyway - so i'll take our design quality over your cock comparisons any day of the week.
:lol: Nice rant.

Gothicform for Prime Minister!

:

Edit: Eh? My reply is before his post?
Even forum mechanisms are against you:)

I won't go back on my word though.

Look at the finesse and intricate design of the shard, with it's numerous technical innovations similar to those in the Swiss RE. The Russia tower is just a big version of one of those Russian rockets without the Soyuz capsule on top.

Yeah its bigger, well done- I'm sure that'll impress all those with simpler tastes.;)

ahhh, who am I kidding? - I would have like to see the Shard be a bit a taller, but in design it's still superior.

glad to see london has some supertalls!!!!!
when will this building start building?

not soon enough.

is it better for london to remain low rise? for the beauty of the old castles there? but of cos, its beautiful futuristic

the russia tower does not for example have low iron crystal clear glass planned for it which is one of the most expensive types of cladding you can get. this is the sort of glass they put on the front of a tv screen or make goblets from, it has high resistance to oxidation, brilliant tensile strength and uniform porosity. it will literally be clad from tip to toe in the same glass you make chandeliers out of!

people should be aware that the budget for london bridge tower is £1.2 billion. thats $2.5 billion dollars. it will be the most expensive skyscraper *ever* built anywhere.

anyone who frankly thinks the russia tower will compare to this in anything more than height has little idea of the detail of the designs of both buildings and the m/e and structural engineering within.

the very top crop of london towers coming along - leadenhall, bishopsgate, and this are totally peerless in the sheer quality being used in building them. you can already see that quality with the willis building and swiss re for yourself and it is nothing less than you would expect for what is the single richest place on the planet. these are what billion dollar buildings look like...

people around the world can build whatever the hell they want, they can make them as tall as they want. i dont care. i want buildings designed and built that have a design life of hundreds of years without having to replace the glass like london bridge tower does. you can build a hundred russia towers or poxy supertall apartment blocks in dubai or chicago but you'll never come close to the build quality on these - you cant afford it in those buildings anyway as that market doesnt exist there which can pay those headline rents - so i'll take our design quality over your cock comparisons any day of the week.

whooooaaaa there buddy. dont bring chicago into this, please:lol:

Yep. The bigger version can be admired in Moscow soon.

/\...so this is presumably the quote that brought on that response.

people around the world can build whatever the hell they want, they can make them as tall as they want. i dont care. i want buildings designed and built that have a design life of hundreds of years without having to replace the glass like london bridge tower does. you can build a hundred russia towers or poxy supertall apartment blocks in dubai or chicago but you'll never come close to the build quality on these - you cant afford it in those buildings anyway as that market doesnt exist there which can pay those headline rents - so i'll take our design quality over your cock comparisons any day of the week.I agree, London is the skyscraper architectural capital of the world and everything else being built is just commie blocks on steriods in comparison :). You're also right that the Shard is 100% quality, that glass is beautiful!

http://www.europaconcorsi.com/db/pub/images/9682/1289504101.jpg

http://img.search.com/thumb/9/94/Soyuz_TMA-3_launch.jpg/270px-Soyuz_TMA-3_launch.jpg

Coincidence? - I think not!

Pesky Russians up to their old tricks! I wouldn't be surprised that every skyscraper in Moscow is in fact some sort of disguised missile. :lol:

Whilst the gentleman's option is this:bowtie:
http://img510.imageshack.us/img510/2803/newrenderingapril20072gn9.jpg

Can we *please* stop mentioning the Russia Tower.

Every time this happens, the thread turns into a flamewar.

Apo-lolo-gies on my part.

But I couldn't resist.:D

im not getting at chicago, or anywhere else here for that matter. its just a question of budget and economics. in london where we have had an apartment sell for 200 million dollars and office space going for thousands of dollars per square metre per year the sheer sums on offer are pretty vast.
the more money you can charge per square foot the more money you can spend per square foot on design. the very top whack buildings proposed for london really have no competitors around the world as there's so much money sloshing around. there's not many towers proposed in london of this class - probably four - but they are of the quality of buildings like HSBC headquarters in hong kong.
an example of this is the trump world tower in new york which cost 300 million dollars. the leadenhall building, 150 feet shorter and over 150,000 square feet smaller is costing over twice as much just on construction. this excludes the design phase which was included in the trump tower budget. one of the things this extra money stretches to, is of course some of the best materials you can get your hands on. they can do this because they can charge perhaps £50 per square foot for space compared to a mere £14 per square foot in the trump world tower.
maybe in 20 or 30 years time then the money will have swung somewhere else but right now the city of london is like the hanseng in the 80s and just like 80s hong kong, one of the ways this money is manifesting itself is in a veritable construction glut with the crown jewels like the shard set to literally gleam as bright as diamonds.

This tower needs to get built.

Scaffolding has begun climbing Southwark Towers. The crane is ready to be erected outside.

is it better for london to remain low rise? for the beauty of the old castles there? but of cos, its beautiful futuristic

yeah London is just a whole load of castles


90% of people actually live in castles

how wide will it be at the base.

So is this project going to be constructed? Or is this unknown so far?

omg its so beautiful!

So is this project going to be constructed? Or is this unknown so far?

There are some funding issues. We'll know for sure in about 4-6 weeks.

There are some funding issues. We'll know for sure in about 4-6 weeks.

All right, thank you. :cheers:

how close to the thames will it be.

you can find it here -
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/maps.php?b=46

thanks for the map i thought st thomas was nearer the london eye.

it is. you have st thomas road mixed up with st thomas hospital
http://www.skyscrapernews.com/maps.php?b=2334

thanks for putting me right.

Construction News magazine -

Hollandia, Cleveland Bridge and a Belgium firm are bidding for the the Shard's £30m steel contract which will see the firm install 12,000 tons of the material.

PC Harrington and O'Rouke are bidding for the £20m concrete contract to build the property's core.

A dutch firm going by the name of Schalaflamburgonblah are in negotiations for a pre-construction contract worth £50m to provide the cladding .

Bids are to submitted over the next month with the winners chosen by the end of the year.

This thread isn't about London being the capital of the world though, it is about The Shard. Maybe people are just sick of explaining every day why London should not be confined to a lowrise city. When you have to explain something all the damn time, sarcasm begins to take the place of a regular argument.

Construction News magazine -

Hollandia, Cleveland Bridge and a Belgium firm are bidding for the the Shard's £30m steel contract which will see the firm install 12,000 tons of the material.

PC Harrington and O'Rouke are bidding for the £20m concrete contract to build the property's core.

A dutch firm going by the name of Schalaflamburgonblah are in negotiations for a pre-construction contract worth £50m to provide the cladding .

Bids are to submitted over the next month with the winners chosen by the end of the year.

Great news Will, good to see this excellent proposal moving forward:) it will trully set a new standard of graceful, soaring and classy architecture for Europe.

This thread isn't about London being the capital of the world though, it is about The Shard. Maybe people are just sick of explaining every day why London should not be confined to a lowrise city. When you have to explain something all the damn time, sarcasm begins to take the place of a regular argument.


Fair point but on the other hand, whether it's here or in other threads, very often someone comes up witht this reprimanding "warning": it's off the subject!
OK but every now and then, a debate seems to pop up about this or that and I think it's a damn shame to just cut it short because "this is not the right thread for it!" Well I'm sorry, but especially in the case of this particular thread (that damn tower it taking forever to even be approved), I think and say it's quite a change to have something else to type or read than 'great tower!', 'will it get built (one day before I die _ I should add)?'

SO!

After living 5 years in the South West of London, I can confirm that not everyone in London dwells in a castle indeed; yes London is a somewhat modern metropol where high rises have a right to exist; but, in my humble opinion, London is also an architectural mess where it is very possible to find lined up in one street next to each other... a beauty from the Victorian ages, a piece of modern genius (Swiss RE for ex) and a lousy dirty smelly kebab shop.
Although of course there are distinct neighborhoods and districts with different specificities each , this multiculturalism, multi ethny, multi-whatever you want, is what quite a few people love about London. It's a great place to live in for many reasons... but I think it's messy; and the skyline translates it quite well I believe. That's my opinion.

I'm sure the Londoners will have a couple of scathing words for me after this message but I do hope it enlightens slightly the person who seemed to think earlier in that thread that London was only a bunch of red brick cottages with Buckingham in the middle.

Good night people!

genial

How bout they change the name .. its too reminiscent of "I think I just Sharted??" .. a mix of trying to fart but instead you push too hard and think you shat yoursef ... sharted!

:| ^^ anyway, hope the shard really pushes through, it'll be truly amazing to have a new tall landmark for London and Britain as a whole.

Fair point but on the other hand, whether it's here or in other threads, very often someone comes up witht this reprimanding "warning": it's off the subject!
OK but every now and then, a debate seems to pop up about this or that and I think it's a damn shame to just cut it short because "this is not the right thread for it!" Well I'm sorry, but especially in the case of this particular thread (that damn tower it taking forever to even be approved), I think and say it's quite a change to have something else to type or read than 'great tower!', 'will it get built (one day before I die _ I should add)?'

SO!

After living 5 years in the South West of London, I can confirm that not everyone in London dwells in a castle indeed; yes London is a somewhat modern metropol where high rises have a right to exist; but, in my humble opinion, London is also an architectural mess where it is very possible to find lined up in one street next to each other... a beauty from the Victorian ages, a piece of modern genius (Swiss RE for ex) and a lousy dirty smelly kebab shop.
Although of course there are distinct neighborhoods and districts with different specificities each , this multiculturalism, multi ethny, multi-whatever you want, is what quite a few people love about London. It's a great place to live in for many reasons... but I think it's messy; and the skyline translates it quite well I believe. That's my opinion.

I'm sure the Londoners will have a couple of scathing words for me after this message but I do hope it enlightens slightly the person who seemed to think earlier in that thread that London was only a bunch of red brick cottages with Buckingham in the middle.

Good night people!

I agree with you on pretty much everything you said.

It is hard though to have to explain the same thing over and over again all the time, why London isn't just a lowrise city. It seems there are always those who don't get the memo!

About London being messy and, well, chaotic. That is one of the reasons it is such a great city. You can stand in a part of London and see everything from a small cafe, to a very old quaint church, to a 1970's International style tower, to a soaring, elegant, futuristic skyscraper. The city is all over the place. And that is what people love about it:)

(Oh, and the Shard IS approved, and demolition is starting:))

(Oh, and the Shard IS approved, and demolition is starting:))

Half right.

Shard is approved.

Demolition of Southwark Towers will start after the current occupants have moved out.

Half right.

Shard is approved.

Demolition of Southwark Towers will start after the current occupants have moved out.

I was reffering to the crane starting to be erected on site, and the scaffolding that recently started climbing the building:)

so we are still waiting for people to move out.

I thought demolision had started! Now your saying its only just starting ?

Time to start doing something

To clarify, they're preparing to start demolition - scaffolding is going up, and windows are being boarded up. The building is about 90% empty now. The last few occupants will be gone in a few weeks, then proper demolition will start.

so its going to be a while then.

so its going to be a while then.

We've been waiting for this for years. A few weeks is NOT a while.

suppose your right then , lets hope its worth the wait.

stunning!
I believe china bank building in HongKong is stunning too

pictures please when demolition starts.

Isn't here anyone with pictures from the demolition?
Would be nice to see, how such a huge building will demolish.

Cranes Rising, from GazKinz in the UK forum

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d155/GazKinz/SUC50301.jpg

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d155/GazKinz/SUC50302.jpg

The Southwark Towers actually look decent in those photos, especially with the reflective glass.

^^ I agree. I think Southwark Towers aren't as bad as most people make out, and there are far worse looking buildings nearby. It's a shame they couldn't replace Guys instead. But still, demolition should be interesting once it finally begins.

I think the NHS have a lot more to be worrying about really than how one of their hospitals looks on the skyline...and I don't think the public would be pleased to pay for it's demolition and replacement (or reclad)

According to Gunners in the UK Forum, the crane is now above Southwark Towers, ready to take it down:)

It's funny, the last people aren't even out of the building yet. Shows how eager the consortium are to get this going IMO:)

The Southwark Towers actually look decent in those photos, especially with the reflective glass.

i wish they were gonna get rid of the Guy's Hospital Tower

I just realized this tower is the only one with a nickname on the supertalls page! the novelty of skyscrapers is really just hitting London, and I think this is proof. 'the pinnacle', 'gherkin', and now, 'the shahd'.

The Shard was actually coined as an insult by EH and the schemes opposers. (Yeah, they aren't very good at insulting things lol). It became popular and blew up in their faces, in fact it became so popular that the official name of the tower became 'Shard/London Bridge'

thanks for the crane photos, cant wait to get started.

indeed EH said something like "a shard of glass stabbed through the heart of london". most people didnt think "shard of glass" was very negative, infact shards of glass tend to be quite beautiful to look at, only dangerous to hold.

The problem with EH is (and they can deny this all they want, it's true) they just can't accept modern buildings that are visible on the skyline... That goes for The Shard, Bishopsgate, Heron and 20 Fenchurch Street. Leadenhall also. I have heard alot of people here say they were happy with Leadenhall, but going through the planning documents I discovered their opposition to the scheme when it was proposed. Atleast they didn't take it to a P.I though...

These next few weeks were meant to be crucial, but things are looking terrible for this project. I'm starting to give up hope of it ever being built.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Delay for UK’s tallest tower as backers struggle for funding
James Rossiter

The timetable for completing the Shard of Glass, intended to be Britain’s tallest building, has been put back by at least a year to 2012 as its backers struggle to secure finance.

The owners of the New London Bridge House project, a 1,016ft skyscraper, had aimed to secure about £350 million this summer to fund construction, but City concern about the financial credibility of Simon Halabi, the one-third owner, had made it hard to gain finance, sources said, as had a souring debt market.

Mr Halabi is thought to be sitting on a £150 million loss after buying the Esporta fitness chain this year for £470 million, only for Société Générale, his main bank lender for the purchase, to put the holding company into administration this month.

A source close to the Shard project said: “There is the problem of Halabi. Esporta is not helping the financing. The reality is people are asking: ‘Has he got the money?’ But this is a more fundable deal than most. Orginally it was planned for 2010. It may take a couple of years longer. If there is finance in the autumn and it goes up by 2011 it can be completed in 2012. The earliest is 2012. No one anticipated the time over planning inquiries and Mr Halabi.”

The Shard project is owned by the Halabi Family Trust, CLS, a property company, and Sellar Property Group.

These next few weeks were meant to be crucial, but things are looking terrible for this project. I'm starting to give up hope of it ever being built.


-----------------------------------------------------------------------------


Delay for UK’s tallest tower as backers struggle for funding
James Rossiter

The timetable for completing the Shard of Glass, intended to be Britain’s tallest building, has been put back by at least a year to 2012 as its backers struggle to secure finance.

The owners of the New London Bridge House project, a 1,016ft skyscraper, had aimed to secure about £350 million this summer to fund construction, but City concern about the financial credibility of Simon Halabi, the one-third owner, had made it hard to gain finance, sources said, as had a souring debt market.

Mr Halabi is thought to be sitting on a £150 million loss after buying the Esporta fitness chain this year for £470 million, only for Société Générale, his main bank lender for the purchase, to put the holding company into administration this month.

A source close to the Shard project said: “There is the problem of Halabi. Esporta is not helping the financing. The reality is people are asking: ‘Has he got the money?’ But this is a more fundable deal than most. Orginally it was planned for 2010. It may take a couple of years longer. If there is finance in the autumn and it goes up by 2011 it can be completed in 2012. The earliest is 2012. No one anticipated the time over planning inquiries and Mr Halabi.”

The Shard project is owned by the Halabi Family Trust, CLS, a property company, and Sellar Property Group.

For fucks sake, when your on a downer about any project you just love to post the good news dont you.

Until you hear something from the developers themselves and not base your mood on another rumour, why dont you just STFU....:bash:

For fucks sake, when your on a downer about any project you just love to post the good news dont you.

Until you hear something from the developers themselves and not base your mood on another rumour, why dont you just STFU....:bash:

Woah! I bet folk in Timbuktu can hear your cage rattling. Take it easy :poke:

For fucks sake, when your on a downer about any project you just love to post the good news dont you.

Until you hear something from the developers themselves and not base your mood on another rumour, why dont you just STFU....:bash:

That was completely uncalled for.

Will was just posting the news article. He (like me) has been very optimistic about this project...only today have we suddenly been hit by the probability that this won't be built.

just hope they get the funding.

Time for us SSC'ers to create a "Shard Fund" methinks

...if only we were millionaires

Are we gona get a big fat glass box instead of the shard that is cheaper to build and easier to fill?

:goodnight

Depressing........

This Halabi character sounds like a real greasy so and so, guess he's in good company though in London's financial centre.

Man, something has to be done about these types, buying up huge pointless debts just so they can sell it of to a bank and get that big fat juicy transaction fee.

This con-man capitalism is getting uggg-ly
They fuck up the financial markets and now on top of that it looks like we won't get our shard.

lets all put into our minds that it aint getting built that way anymore set backs and it won't hit as hard.God damn halabi:ohno:

For fucks sake, when your on a downer about any project you just love to post the good news dont you.

Until you hear something from the developers themselves and not base your mood on another rumour, why dont you just STFU....:bash:

I suspect a pm is coming your way me ladddio.

posted by DarJoLe in the UK Forums:

AJplus.co.uk
Published 28 August 2007 at 11:32, updated 11:40
Renzo’s backers rubbish rumours of delay to Shard

http://www.ajplus.co.uk/Images/Articles/280707_SHARD_MAIN.jpg

The group behind Renzo Piano’s London ‘Shard’ scheme has strongly denied rumours the project will be delayed by more than a year.
A report in yesterday's The Times claimed Piano’s much-anticipated ‘Shard of Glass’ scheme would be delayed until 2012 at the earliest because of one of the project’s backers faced funding problems.

However, the story has been rubbished by a Sellar Property Group spokesman, which is one of the main parties delivering the 310m-high development.

The spokesman said: ‘I don’t know where they got the story from, but it’s simply not true. The scaffolding is going up as we speak and once that has happened the existing building [Southwark Towers] will be demolished. Everything is progressing as planned.’

The Times had reported that Simon Habali, a one-third owner of the Shard, had found it hard to secure funding for the project due to him ‘sitting on a £150 million loss’ after buying the Esporta fitness chain for £470 million earlier this year.

The article added that Habali, Sellar and CLS – another property group – hoped to raise £350 million over the summer to finance the project, but this had not transpired and so the scheme would not be completed ‘until at least 2012’.

However, according to Sellar Property, the completion date remains at 2011.

by Richard Vaughan

^^ So, after one thing we hear a completely different story.

I've got to be honest, this project is starting to irritate me.

i suppose until demolition starts we just dont know.

I'm being optimisitc about this project, it will happen no matter who decides to be negative or stir pessimism onto the forum.

Last few tenants have moved out. The entire site is now completely vacant.


http://img175.imageshack.us/img175/9458/img1607ew0.jpg


http://img48.imageshack.us/img48/5852/img1608yd2.jpg




Photo credit: Jimbo

I can't wait until the day where I walk down Ringmore rise and see this building

http://i35.photobucket.com/albums/d157/Ginola90/ringmore_rd_view-1.jpg

:banana: :cheers: :banana: :cheers: :banana:

^^ nice picture


this is an exciting project

wow^^you will sure get a good view of it...if i ever gets built that is...

with the crane up it looks promising.

I'm new to the forum, and well a bit of a noob when it comes to some of the projects that are going on around London but i've taken a keen interest. London in 2012 will have a terrific skyline, the Shard will only add to its beauty of modern architecture and I desperately hope they can resolve funding issues.

Welcome to the forums Splish! It seems to just be a funding argument rather than a lack thereof - I too hope it can be resolved soon.

Thank you elfabyanos :)

I'm not upset about the constant delays this project has had but I wouldn't like it if this tower wasn't to proceed, might cost a fortune but it will make a stunning addition to the skyline, and since it will supposedly attract 'the same number of tourists as the london eye' surely their missing out on valuable profits?

Big article here on Building.co.uk -

http://www.building.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=583&storycode=3094541

NOTE: If you scroll down, near the bottom there are 3 videos showing the construction method. The first one looks awesome!

Nice videos.

So, it begins....

Good article BTW, interesting to note how structural steel is going to be used roughly half way up, then concrete on top of that. Usually it's the other way round.

demo stands for?

It stands for demolition.

Subliving.

shouldnt it say approved?

No, because the current status of the project is demolition of the current site...

ok i see :)

Source (10.09): (http://www.worldarchitecturenews.com/)

Tower finances cast shadow over project

Funding for London’s tallest tower is once again in crisis mode. The troubled £350 million London Bridge Tower ( LBT) known as the Shard of Glass by Renzo Piano is scheduled to be the tallest building in Europe, and has been heralded as an exemplar design. However, once again a crisis is brewing around Syrian born Simon Halabi who owns a third share of the project. He has been in the news over his disasterous £460 million investment in Esporta, the sports and fitness chain which went into admistration this month. His personal losses on Esporta have raised questions about his involvement with the LBT but as with any private individual, finances can be difficult to unravel. The total value of his commercial property empire has been estimated at up to £5bn, of which around £2bn is equity. Halabi is no stranger to controversy. His previous row with LBT co-developer Irvine Sellar had acrimonilously ended up in court. Earlier this year Halabi also had a run-in with his advisers. In July, a case was brought by KPMG against him for unpaid fees, but Halabi settled at the doors of the court, reportedly paying some £1.2m to the accountancy firm.

Enabling works and demolition have already started on LBT and the project is due for completion in 2011.

Michael Hammond
London

^^ I won't trust any article that can't even spell "administration".

nothing new there...what I don't get with the shard is £350 million?Pinnacle = £500 million (minimum)...Anyone elaborate?

^^ I won't trust any article that can't even spell "administration".

or the word acrimoniously.

Looking forward to seeing this building go up.

or the word acrimoniously.What's wrong with this word?

Overall design is nice, ground level is shite.

ground level is shite.

Erm...... why?

The base is one of the best features in my opinion. And compared to what's there at the moment it's a million times better. This will totally transform the area, from a concrete 70's hell-hole into an extremely modern attractive part of London.

http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers/lbt/base.jpg

Erm...... why?

The base is one of the best features in my opinion. And compared to what's there at the moment it's a million times better. This will totally transform the area, from a concrete 70's hell-hole into an extremely modern attractive part of London.

I don't know what's there currently, not really considering that.

I just think the ground-level design looks a bit too vertical and glassy. It's the sort of thing that looks nice in renders, less so in person.

One guy's opinion, anyway.

i love the ground level, but i think it could be more grand

i agree, it could have more luster to the ground level, but great bldg overall

I don't know what's there currently




http://www.willfox.com/images/london/5/37.jpg


http://www.willfox.com/images/london/5/38.jpg

the thing is from a distance people aren't going to notice it from ground level, they'll be looking at it up up up......for the vast majority of the time as with all tall buildings and to look over other buildings.

I think it looks fine the way it is, one guy is entitled to his opinion but that doesn't mean I have to agree with him.

I have to admit that the base looks great, just like the rest of the tower.

^^ Agree.

So the last render has the Piano eggs, cafes & overhead canopy, just like his Aurora Place in Sydney:

http://www.mrbamboo.com.au/ideas_and_places/australia/aurora_place/AuroraPlace_Large1.JPG

...

wjfox2002: Yeah, that's pretty god-awful. Def an upgrade.

cant wait till it starts.

cant wait till it starts.

Stop making spam posts like this.

nothing new there...what I don't get with the shard is £350 million?Pinnacle = £500 million (minimum)...Anyone elaborate?

I have a feeling it might just be that the Shard was proposed quite a few years earlier, and the figure quoted in the article is just out of date? When it was first mooted there was generally less construction going on, now the industry is in boom in London and raw materials have also gone up in price globally. But I'm not 100% certain.

That aurura place in Sydney looks quite interesting - i really havent contrasted the Shard with much of Piano's otherworkds - but the similarities (especially horizontal glass canopies) are starting to emerge.

Stop making spam posts like this.

sorry maybe i am not aware of the situation but the only thing he did was saying he was impatient the building start I dont see the problem with that ...

BTW can anyone say me what demo means maybe demonstration but what do you mean by that ? :)

sorry maybe i am not aware of the situation but the only thing he did was saying he was impatient the building start I dont see the problem with that ...

It becomes a problem when virtually all of his posts in this thread are the same - "wow", "nice", "cant wait", etc...



BTW can anyone say me what demo means maybe demonstration but what do you mean by that ? :)

Demolition, obviously.

From today's Evening Standard

Shard backer CLS warns global worries taking toll

Property group CLS, one of the backers of the Shard of Glass tower, today warned the US mortgage crisis was having a major impact on its business. The UK commercial property market was facing particularly tough times, he said: "This less-optimistic outlook may continue due to the recent concerns in the global finance market triggered by the falls in US subprime mortgage lending."

However, the company said it was confident the Shard would go ahead. Funding options were still under review, it said. Pre-tax profits fell 43.8% to £31.9 million in the six months to the end of June. Net rental income was down 2.4% at £32.4 million because of the sale of a property portfolio.

ok thanx for the anwser i am less ignorant now :colgate:

so they are taking that ugly building down that make me even happier about this project

Some big, big news today...... it's looking very good for this project.

------------------------------



Shard bankers give Halabi 10 days to sell

By Danny Fortson
Published: 18 September 2007

The banks behind The Shard skyscraper have given Simon Halabi 10 days to sell out his one-third holding in the project, according to a key partner in the development to build Europe's tallest building.

Sten Mortstedt, the executive chairman of CLS, a partner on the project, said: "The banks don't want to have him in. He has got an offer from a third party to buy his shares, and he must decide within 10 days whether to accept."

http://news.independent.co.uk/business/news/article2973636.ece


------------------------------



Middle East backer could lift Shard off the ground

James Rossiter, Property Correspondent

Construction of Britain’s tallest building, the “Shard of Glass”, has ground to a halt over funding difficulties.

The three owners of the planned 310m (1,016ft) skyscraper at London Bridge are in talks with a new Middle Eastern backer to buy a one-third stake in the scheme owned by Simon Halabi. A deal may help to kick-start the troubled funding talks.

...

“We are in final negotiations with a bank and a new owner partner,” Mr Mortstedt said. Asked if the new owner would replace Mr Halabi, he replied: “Correct - he has to say yes or no to an offer.” The other backer is Sellar Property Group, but Mr Mortstedt said that he was happy with this company as an ongoing partner.

The new owner “has very deep pockets”, Mr Mortstedt said, and is understood to come from the Middle East. A five-year development loan is needed, worth about £350 million.

http://business.timesonline.co.uk/tol/business/industry_sectors/construction_and_property/article2477876.ece

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=725&storycode=3095575&c=1&encCode=000000000139ccc3

http://i8.tinypic.com/6g2nfgm.jpg


Piano's Shard will be built, says Ken

18 September, 2007
By Helen Crump

Mayor of London Ken Livingstone has guaranteed his support for Renzo Piano’s troubled Shard skyscraper.

Speaking at the launch of his first ever housing plan, the mayor said he had “no intention” of withdrawing from Transport for London’s commitment to take up a large amount of office space in the tower, which would be London’s first skyscraper with a public viewing point.

Speculation has been building in recent weeks over funding difficulties for the 310m-high building.

“I do think the Shard will be built,” Livingstone said. “It will be for London what the Empire State Building is for New York.”

The news came as the mayor said he would drive up the quality of new homes, revealing a massive building programme, including boosting by 50,000 the number of affordable homes built by 2011.

in my opinion, this tower is a copy from transamerica tower, but whit more glass :D

thanx for the updates wjfox.
and congrats, I always knew they would build it. financing is a b*** though.

http://www.bdonline.co.uk/story.asp?sectioncode=725&storycode=3095575&c=1&encCode=000000000139ccc3

http://i8.tinypic.com/6g2nfgm.jpg


Piano's Shard will be built, says Ken

18 September, 2007
By Helen Crump

Mayor of London Ken Livingstone has guaranteed his support for Renzo Piano’s troubled Shard skyscraper.

Speaking at the launch of his first ever housing plan, the mayor said he had “no intention” of withdrawing from Transport for London’s commitment to take up a large amount of office space in the tower, which would be London’s first skyscraper with a public viewing point.

Speculation has been building in recent weeks over funding difficulties for the 310m-high building.

“I do think the Shard will be built,” Livingstone said. “It will be for London what the Empire State Building is for New York.”

The news came as the mayor said he would drive up the quality of new homes, revealing a massive building programme, including boosting by 50,000 the number of affordable homes built by 2011.
That doesn't make any sense because Ken doesn't have anything to do with it. What if suddenly the company planning it go bust or something else happens that's unforeseen. Its such a big project and risk to take on its not likely that many other companies or people would take the project over if something happens.

^^ Well, you could say that about any project...and the mayor was obviously just giving us confidence in that the Transport dept. was commited to taking up (a large amount) space in the tower. What's the problem there?

Qatar is secret Shard investor

07:59 | 19.09.07

The Qatari government has emerged as the secret investor set to buy the one-third stake in the Shard of Glass development from Simon Halabi. Financial Times

The investment arm of the Qatari government is understood to have nudged ahead of rival Pramerica, the US financial institution, to secure the stake in the City of London skyscraper scheme.

Halabi fell out with the other two partners in the scheme, CLS and Sellar Properties, in a long-running dispute over the respective sizes of stake and project management fees.

in my opinion, this tower is a copy from transamerica tower, but whit more glass :D

This argument has been made (and debunked) numerous times.


Anyway, good to see that the Qatari government is trying to get Halabi's stake. We should know in a week or so wether they are successful (Next friday I think?)

I can't see the Qatari government going bust lol.

Thank god for middle east investors. Thanks to them, Heron Tower is going aead, Bishopsgate Tower is going ahead, London got a nice new stadium (emirates) and they could be funding the Shard too. Excellent:)

will the heron and bishopsgate be a lot shorter than the shard?

will the heron and bishopsgate be a lot shorter than the shard?

See here - http://skyscraperpage.com/diagrams/?30561812

thanx for that

will there be an obs deck and what floor ?

Thread says demo -- any progress? Pics?

will there be an obs deck and what floor ?

Floors 31, 32, 33, 65 and 66.


http://www.willfox.com/images/skyscrapers/lbt/floorsdiagram.jpg

best tower in Europe!

the russia tower does not for example have low iron crystal clear glass planned for it which is one of the most expensive types of cladding you can get. this is the sort of glass they put on the front of a tv screen or make goblets from, it has high resistance to oxidation, brilliant tensile strength and uniform porosity. it will literally be clad from tip to toe in the same glass you make chandeliers out of!

people should be aware that the budget for london bridge tower is £1.2 billion. thats $2.5 billion dollars. it will be the most expensive skyscraper *ever* built anywhere.

anyone who frankly thinks the russia tower will compare to this in anything more than height has little idea of the detail of the designs of both buildings and the m/e and structural engineering within.

the very top crop of london towers coming along - leadenhall, bishopsgate, and this are totally peerless in the sheer quality being used in building them. you can already see that quality with the willis building and swiss re for yourself and it is nothing less than you would expect for what is the single richest place on the planet. these are what billion dollar buildings look like...


people around the world can build whatever the hell they want, they can make them as tall as they want. i dont care. i want buildings designed and built that have a design life of hundreds of years without having to replace the glass like london bridge tower does. you can build a hundred russia towers or poxy supertall apartment blocks in dubai or chicago but you'll never come close to the build quality on these - you cant afford it in those buildings anyway as that market doesnt exist there which can pay those headline rents - so i'll take our design quality over your cock comparisons any day of the week.

I quite agree that the overall design, originality, quality and detail are very important factors in the overall success of an architectural structure. Gothicform includes a picture of the superb Swiss Re building, which although is not outstandingly tall is a true iconic structure. Consider the greatest buildings of the past century, such as the Sydney Opera House or Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, and we see that excellance of design trumps size or height in making a building truly iconic. On the other hand, one should not wax rhapsodic over a structure costings "2.5 billion dollars" ... because several structures under construction now are going to exceed that amount ... for example The City Center in Las Vegas is going to cost 7.5 Billion Dollars at the very least, and there are several projects here in North America that will cost over 2 billion -- and yes, these structures will be built by awarding winning world class architects using the finest construction materials. Rather, I say let us praise skyscrapers for their innovation and artistic appeal and how about the ability to be environmentally friendly and economic in power usage? I think sheer height is passe ...:)

thats $2.5 billion dollars. it will be the most expensive skyscraper *ever* built anywhere. HaHa... WTC 1 is already up tp $3 billion with the republican weak dollar in place.


nothing less than you would expect for what is the single richest place on the planet. these are what billion dollar buildings look like...

LOL... I don't even want to embarrass you. Just take my word its not London. :lol:

So, it always seems to come down to Middle East investment to make things pop in London.

I quite agree that the overall design, originality, quality and detail are very important factors in the overall success of an architectural structure. Gothicform includes a picture of the superb Swiss Re building, which although is not outstandingly tall is a true iconic structure. Consider the greatest buildings of the past century, such as the Sydney Opera House or Gehry's Guggenheim Museum in Bilbao, and we see that excellance of design trumps size or height in making a building truly iconic. On the other hand, one should not wax rhapsodic over a structure costings "2.5 billion dollars" ... because several structures under construction now are going to exceed that amount ... for example The City Center in Las Vegas is going to cost 7.5 Billion Dollars at the very least, and there are several projects here in North America that will cost over 2 billion -- and yes, these structures will be built by awarding winning world class architects using the finest construction materials. Rather, I say let us praise skyscrapers for their innovation and artistic appeal and how about the ability to be environmentally friendly and economic in power usage? I think sheer height is passe ...:)
Nicely written phillybud. So instead of mine is bigger than yours, it's mine is more expensive. Nothing new there. Well the dollar and the pound float around a lot, not so long ago it was one dollar to the pound, now it's two ... much longer ago it was four, that clearly doesn't mean the architectural value of the building has correspondingly changed. As buildings go higher they cost more, if they are built in the middle of highly developed cities that makes them even more expensive. It would be interesting to compare the ground cost per square foot in London, with Dubai, New York, Chicago, Moscow, Hong Kong etc etc. Not to mention the planning approval costs. Sheer height only counts when you "passe" the next tallest haha.

well plenty of lookout points then.

HaHa... WTC 1 is already up tp $3 billion with the republican weak dollar in place.



LOL... I don't even want to embarrass you. Just take my word its not London. :lol:

So, it always seems to come to to Middle East investment to make things pop in London.


erm, i think youl find London is the Richest place on Earth.
down Bishopsgate street alone there are deals worth Trillions of Pounds (£) going through it every day.

also there was that list, showing the top richest citys and the proof, i dont know where it is now, :(

erm, i think youl find London is the Richest place on Earth.
down Bishopsgate street alone there are deals worth Trillions of Pounds (£) going through it every day.

also there was that list, showing the top richest citys and the proof, i dont know where it is now, :(
London certainly has the largest economy of any metro area in Europe (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_metropolitan_areas_in_the_European_Union_by_GRP) with a GDP of about $550 billion, however New York has a GDP of almost $1 trillion, and Tokyo is more than $1 trillion. Sure huge money flows pass through London's financial system, but probably no more than New York or Tokyo on a daily basis. The really big deals today are done globally between these three centers. BTW world GDP is about $50 trillion so it seems unlikely that deals of "Trillions of Pounds " are done every day.

Back to the Shard.

Has demolition work started? last photo showed scaffolding going up.

The City overtook New York in terms of volume of trade fairly recently.

damn, SSC sure has alot of city vs city- junkies.
do you all put up pics of your city on your wall and get off to them:lol:

I was merely stating a fact! And London isn't my city anyway.

no it wasnt you.. anyways its human nature. I was just crackin a joke

Respect Astounded. Someone who knows and quotes figures accurately on economics is rare on SSC.

Do i recall somebody saying that London Bridge Tower is a copy of transamerica tower?

I wonder what inspired that parallel. Oh let me guess, they're both conical. I know, while we're at it, 3 world trade centre is a copy of St Helens, they're both box shaped. Burj Dubai is a copy of Sears tower, they're both staggered shaped, and Petronas are obviously copies of Chrysler, they all have nice spires.

Tharpe, your right, the City of London, (square mile), has the richest income per capita of any other metro region.

wow, shangri-la hotel has really made some moves. they are exapdning very quickly!

(deleted) - how are messages really deleted?

Tharpe, your right, the City of London, (square mile), has the richest income per capita of any other metro region.
Respect noted Aleboy, so you'll appreciate how silly it is to talk about income per capita of a "metro region" with 9,200 population. Dividing the GDP of the City by the 9200 residents, mostly local workers who live there, is nonsense. Metro regions have populations measured in millions. How about the per capita income of Bill Gates estate?

http://www.cantorseinuk.com/images/largeImages/75_cs_detail_img1_lg.gif

Image from WSP Cantor Seinuk (http://www.cantorseinuk.com/cs_port_detail.cfm?pid=75#) the structural engineers.

This building will transform Southwark, let's get started!

cant wait for that image for real?

Respect noted Aleboy, so you'll appreciate how silly it is to talk about income per capita of a "metro region" with 9,200 population. Dividing the GDP of the City by the 9200 residents, mostly local workers who live there, is nonsense. Metro regions have populations measured in millions. How about the per capita income of Bill Gates estate?

As an economist I wouldn't hesitate to calculate income per capita of a region with population of 9200. That number is big enough although it wouldn't reveal high income per worker in London. GDP per capita figures are compiled for countries like Palau which have very small populations.

My wording was poor. City workers rather than city residents was the group to whom I was referring. Also, by metro region i meant the City of London as a region of the Greater London metropolitan area, just like Chelsea and Kensington.

Defining a metro area as somewhere that should be 'measured in millions' is a tricky business because population does not necessarily correlate with the definition of metropolitan. It is, rather, a description of an urban area, which has adjacent towns and suburbs, not a marker which denotes a population of an urban area has exceeded a particular threshold.

I suppose the colloquialisms employed in my earlier post undermined any academic credibility I might have. Such overt ineptitude proved too tempting a target.

http://img250.imageshack.us/img250/2898/0lbt1democranedy0.jpg

The demolition crane is up and ready to go!

Dunno how old the photo is, anyone nearby with a camera?

its looking promising if the cranes up and ready to go.

That's only for the demolition of the existing building there.

its been there for a good few weeks. PwC only just finished moving out in early Sept, so they will be soft stripping and putting up the scaffolding around the outside. That said, I understand that some UK forumers think the demolition has ground to a halt until the funding and consortium are agreed (1/3rd partner looks like he's being forced out to be replaced by a Middle Eastern government investment fund). Personally I think its progressing on plan, whatever eventually transpires with the Shard funding etc, the demolition of the existing building is guaranteed.

http://www.cantorseinuk.com/images/largeImages/75_cs_detail_img1_lg.gif


The new London is emerging from the ground, i carnt stop thinking this but just look how the shard compares to the buildings around, eg the car garage on the left, remnants of old inferior 1980’s developments, taking over by 21’st century sleek modern “planned,” architectural design and town cityscape planning!!

Looks amazing. :cheers: