London Skybar

[potto]

moved to overall project thread

[Loathing]

Thomas Heatherwick designs new bridge connecting South Bank to Covent Garden

[Officer Dibble]

Nice, but where's the cycle lane?

[.Adam]

More importantly where's the bridges in East London?

[ill tonkso]

Originally Posted by Loathing

Where has Hungerford Bridge gone?

Besides, that Rogers design would be impossibly expensive. We could build a new airport for the price of that thing.

I'm actually surprised Darjole posted that image, considering his recent attacks of Boris Johnson for "wasting" our money on new, starchitect-desinged buses.

This proposal is ancient now, it meant the closure of CX and the truncation of the line at Waterloo East. It would have caused a shitstorm. Plus, I really don't like the contrast with the Embankment buildings.

[Loathing]

I know it's ancient, and I agree it would have been a bad idea and a waste of money. It gets posted around here quite a lot though -- often by Darjole. Apart from the image having a kind of futuristic cool vibe to it, I have no idea why it keeps getting posted.

Anyway, I hope the Heatherwick bridge does get built. If only I were a multimillionaire -- I'd pick up my phone on Monday morning and send them my money posthaste.

[Vnofd5]

The Gherkin deserves protected views, says Ken Shuttleworth

Gherkin is the St Paul’s Cathedral of the future, says architect

Ken Shuttleworth has called for new viewing corridors to be introduced to protect the Gherkin from a new generation of towers springing up in London.

The Make chief likened the tower to St Paul’s Cathedral, which is the subject of a number of protected vistas stretching across London, and said it should be listed.

The Swiss Re headquarters needs official protection to stop it from being shrouded by new developments, he said.

It was one of the St Paul’s viewing corridors that dictated the distinctive wedge shape of Rogers Stirk Harbour & Partners’ Cheesegrater, a building that now almost obliterates views of the Gherkin from Blackfriars Bridge.

Shuttleworth’s views are bound to spark controversy since he was part of the team at Foster & Partners that designed 30 St Mary Axe. Questions of its authorship have rumbled on ever since he left the practice to set up on his own.

Speaking about the future of tall buildings in the wake of Unesco’s concerns about London’s heritage, he said: “The best future St Paul’s will be the Gherkin.

“I think it will be listed, perhaps not now but in 20 years’ time. I think it should be protected. People should be mapping out those invisible lines for the Gherkin. It’s a fantastic icon and for its time it’s really energy-efficient.”

Speaking at the Council for Tall Buildings and Urban Habitat conference, he also praised the Shard, a building he has previously predicted will be torn down and replaced in a matter of years.

Shuttleworth also predicted the next generation of towers will be more rational than those currently being built because they were all designed before the crash.

He's always so modest

[potto]

I see now why he claimed tall buildings were obsolete

[danm]

http://www.standard.co.uk/comment/co...s-8663337.html

Boris Johnson: London needs a new airport to stay world-class
A third runway at Heathrow will not stave off long-term competition for business from our global rivals


Eastern promise: Foster + Partners’ proposal for a new four-runway airport in the Thames Estuary

Boris Johnson

18 June 2013

The people who run Heathrow are doing their best. Their airport is bursting at the seams. They must deal with the fury of those who fly thousands of miles only to circle over London for half an hour and then miss their connecting flights. They must cope with the longest taxi-out times in Europe. They must be ready for the slightest disruption to cause chaos. Yes, the staff at Heathrow are doing exceptionally well in running a hub airport that is at 98.5 per cent capacity. They treat the suffering multitudes with great politeness and, in proposing a way forward, Heathrow’s bosses are treating the public like absolute idiots.

They say they want a third runway “now” and then maybe a fourth runway “later”. Of all the miserable, useless, cynical examples of corporate short-termism and greed, this takes some beating. It would need about 15 to 18 years — with a fair wind and favourable judges — to build a third runway in London’s western suburbs. The thing would not open until the late 2020s, at which point huge new sectors of London would find themselves under the roar of the flightpath. We would have recklessly exacerbated the Heathrow problem — which already causes a third of the aircraft noise pollution endured by the whole of Europe.

Then what? Does anyone seriously believe that Heathrow bosses would declare themselves satisfied with this disaster? How could they, with only three runways — when Madrid has four, Paris Charles de Gaulle six, Frankfurt four and Amsterdam’s Schiphol has space for a seventh — and when aviation demand will continue to climb and the winners in the global race will be those with the best connections to the growing cities of Asia and Latin America?

As soon as a third runway was completed, Heathrow would be clamouring to compete with its continental rivals (to say nothing of Dubai or Mumbai), and we would find ourselves having the same arguments over again, about the need for the fourth runway — but with the position a hundred times worse: with west London jammed with traffic and the skies of the greatest city on earth filled with planes.

It is time to end the madness, and back out of the intellectual cul-de-sac. We need to do what all our competitors are doing or have done. We need a 24-hour, four-runway hub airport, preferably to the east of London, so planes can land without causing misery to millions. We need room to expand, and we will never find enough at Heathrow.

It is utter nonsense to claim that a new airport would mean some kind of economic devastation in west London. On the contrary, Heathrow accounts for about three per cent of the jobs in what is one of the most dynamic and competitive parts of the UK. We face a crippling housing shortage in London — and here is a whole beautiful new borough waiting to be called into being. We are looking at an area the size of Kensington and Chelsea, with the potential for tens of thousands of homes, hi-tech industry, university campuses and, if need be, a vestigial airport.

In the east we would finally have the space to do what is needed: create a logistics hub that links road, rail, sea and air — in which the new DP World deep-water port would be linked to the airport by the forthcoming Lower Thames Crossing, on which the Government has begun consultation.

For an indication of how it would work, look at the 2020 Vision for London which the GLA published last week. This is the solution that matches the scale of this country’s needs and ambitions. With high-speed rail and road links, Transport for London officials are confident that it would be easily accessible to the whole of the UK.

Of all the options we have looked at in the past two years, this is the one that offers the most breathtaking scope for regeneration, job creation, and, above all, future expansion. There would be no more agony, no more fear that London would be endlessly blighted by planes, no more trying to pour a quart into a pint pot.

My officials think the combined logistics hub and aerotropolis would create up to 500,000 jobs, and would drive not just London — east and west — but the whole UK economy. It would help us recapture business we have lost over the past century — through failure to expand our transport infrastructure — to our continental rivals. London was overtaken as a port because we failed to follow the Dutch and make space for the big container ships. We are making the same mistake with aviation.

How many UK regional airports does Heathrow serve? Seven. How many UK regional airports are served by Schiphol? Twenty-seven. How on earth can we call Heathrow an adequate national hub airport? Other airports are eating our lunch, and we must fight back.

Yes, the new airport is a big project, and will involve some dislocation, and immense political drive and leadership. But it is infinitely better than desperately pretending we can go on with a third runway at Heathrow, or a second runway at Gatwick, or “Heathwick” or any other half-cock solution.

I don’t blame the Heathrow bosses for their short-termism, or for trying to pull the wool over people’s eyes about the real agenda. They have no fiduciary duty to their shareholders — most of whom are overseas — to take account of the quality of life of the people of London or the long-term needs of the UK economy. They are there, like all good business people, to make as much money as they can over a 15-year time horizon — which is as far ahead as businesses can think. We need to think long-term, and think big, about what is in the interests of this city and this country, and the first step to sanity is to reject the third runway at Heathrow.

[DANE81]

I apologise for this slightly off-topic thread and I am not here as an advert, but I am an illustrator/cartoonist that specialises in 'Where's Wally' / Wimmelbilderbuch pictures, and I have long wanted to produce a picture of London that will encompass the essence of London - with the hope of selling the picture at tourist outlets. The problem I have is identifying a perspective of London (parliament hill? a bridge in central London, Hyde Park?) that not only could capture a streetscape of London, but include all of it's landmarks - a tough call considering they are all spread out. To appeal to tourists it would have to have cliches such as beefeaters, London buses, the Beatles crossing the zebra crossing, but also capturing historic and modern landmarks - preferably all of them. Can anyone suggest a 'real' viewpoint that would be a good starting point, or would it be best to use artistic license? here are some examples of my previous work - I want my drawing to be a poster, so at least A1 in size.

image hosted on flickr

File0520A by DANE8126, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

Aquaverse by DANE8126, on Flickr

image hosted on flickr

PWS by DANE8126, on Flickr

[DANE81]

Originally Posted by Vnofd5

He's always so modest

seems like a highly irrational person flitting from one comment to the next!

[Lilbaz]

I'd go for artistic licence. You will want big ben, nelson and tower bridge in there.

[Officer Dibble]

Originally Posted by DANE81

I apologise for this slightly off-topic thread and I am not here as an advert, but I am an illustrator/cartoonist that specialises in 'Where's Wally' / Wimmelbilderbuch pictures, and I have long wanted to produce a picture of London that will encompass the essence of London - with the hope of selling the picture at tourist outlets. The problem I have is identifying a perspective of London (parliament hill? a bridge in central London, Hyde Park?) that not only could capture a streetscape of London, but include all of it's landmarks - a tough call considering they are all spread out. To appeal to tourists it would have to have cliches such as beefeaters, London buses, the Beatles crossing the zebra crossing, but also capturing historic and modern landmarks - preferably all of them. Can anyone suggest a 'real' viewpoint that would be a good starting point, or would it be best to use artistic license? here are some examples of my previous work - I want my drawing to be a poster, so at least A1 in size.

Those are great.

Suggest you have a look through the skyline photos thread - http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1577749

some of the best real views on this page imo
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showth...1577749&page=9

And if you want to capture all the tall buildings then there's the condensed pic that used to head up the summary thread (I think it was wjfox's handiwork, wasn't it?)
http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showthread.php?t=1545866

But certainly if you want also to get in some smaller-scale icons then some major artistic licence will need to kick in sooner or later.

[Sesquip]

I don't think there's anywhere you could actually stand to get all the landmarks in view at once. The city's too big, and the bends in the river prevent everything lining up. What I would do is use the 3D mapping interface on http://here.com/ and have a spin around the city. I suspect that a view from over Elephant & Castle, looking North, would be your best bet. Parliament on the left, Tower of London on the right.

[Gudavalli]

China's Dalian Wanda to Build Luxury Hotels Overseas

BEIJING—A year after targeting U.S. movie theaters, a Chinese property magnate is sketching out global plans for a new focus: Chinese tourists.

Dalian Wanda Group Chairman Wang Jianlin announced plans on Wednesday to spend £700 million ($1.09 billion) on a London hotel and apartment complex that will be the first step in spending billions of dollars on opening Chinese luxury hotels abroad. One of the complex's two towers will also be the tallest residential building in London.

He also said he hopes to draw U.S. cooperation for a Hollywood-style theme park and movie studio in China, and to spend an estimated 60 billion yuan ($9.8 billion) on a series of resorts on China's coast.

All told, the plans Mr. Wang sketched out on Wednesday total between $14.3 billion and $15.3 billion. Though an enormous sum, analysts say Wanda is one of the few companies that could pull off so many ambitious projects, because it has managed similar endeavors in the past. Last year, Wanda bought the U.S. movie chain AMC Entertainment Holdings Inc. for $2.6 billion.

The sheer magnitude of the investments, which span at least four continents, could create management, operational, and funding challenges. To boot, the hotel industry, in which Wanda will be the first Chinese company to step into the luxury segment, is fierce and full of well-established rivals that have cornered the luxury-hospitality market and have long navigated the high expenses involved with serving luxury consumers globally.

"You have to get everything right in the luxury hotel business, and I'm not sure they have the expertise to do that at this point," said Torsten Stocker, a Hong Kong-based consultant. Without experience, it may be difficult for Wanda to grasp U.S. and European demands, he said.

Even the confident Mr. Wang admitted that blazing the trail for Chinese companies beyond China's borders has risks.

"Half of international acquisitions are going to fail, especially for China, which is just going international," Mr. Wang said in an interview. "But Chinese companies will become international companies sooner or later, so we have to take this step. Failures are our tuition."

Still, from a branding perspective, building namesake properties overseas is a smart move, said Mr. Stocker. Despite Wanda's recent acquisitions, the company's name is little known outside of China and it is aiming for more recognition.

Wanda said it plans to use its own cash, along with bank financing and expected cash flow from each project to support the outlay.

Wanda is a closely held conglomerate with holdings ranging from property to entertainment to tourism. Though now based in Beijing, Wanda got its start in the northeastern Chinese city of Dalian in 1988 as a residential real estate company. The company has assets of $48 billion and an annual income of $23 billion, according to its website.

The 58 year-old Mr. Wang said the larger bet at expansion would pay off, in part because of China's rising middle class, for whom Wanda already has cachet. "A large population is a burden when we are poor, but when we are rich, it's a market," he said.

Mr. Wang said the company will announce a luxury-hotel project in New York later this year, part of its plans to build in the next decade namesake luxury hotels, each costing an estimated $500 million, in eight to 10 cities. Mr. Wang said he is eyeing Washington, Los Angeles, Sydney, Tokyo and Paris, among other locations.

Comparing Wanda to Hilton and Hyatt, Mr. Wang said the company would seek to attract all tourists, not just Chinese tourists. Still, at its heart the bet is a play to grab a piece of the growing amount of money spent by Chinese traveling overseas for pleasure and investment.

China's outbound travelers have become a critical growth market for global tourism and the global hotel industry. China's spending on outbound travel swelled to number one in the world last year, at $102 billion, a 40% jump from 2011. At the same time, Chinese citizens have become significant property buyers in the overseas market, snapping up real estate globally and particularly in North America and Europe as local buyers have retreated.

Wanda isn't the only Chinese company aiming to cash in on tourists. AXA Private Equity and Chinese conglomerate Fosun International Ltd. 0656.HK -3.93% moved in May to take over French resort operator Club Méditerranée SA CU.FR -0.45% with the hopes of expanding the resort chain in emerging markets.

For all of the efforts abroad, Mr. Wang said he remains bullish on domestic luxury spending. As proof, he said the company is investing an estimated 60 billion yuan in three harbor-side resorts.

The resorts, which will include marinas to service yachts, are a part of Wanda's aim to build support for the industry that has struggled to take off in China amid a lack of infrastructure. Wanda confirmed Wednesday it would acquire control of U.K. yacht-maker Sunseeker International for £320 million.

China's yacht owners make up a fraction of the nearly three million high-net-worth individuals whose assets are more than 6 million yuan, according to Shanghai-based wealth research firm Hurun Report.