The Architects' Journal have reported that Land Securities are planning a tower for the City of London.
Designed by Rafael Vinoly, it will be 45 storeys and will replace an existing 90m midrise built in the 1960's. The site is near the river, close to London Bridge, to the south of the main skyscraper cluster.
Apparently the building will resemble a "huge curved television facing the Thames" or the 1950s Ericsson phone design.
The proposals are set to go before Corporation planners this summer.
According to sources working on the project, the design is "deferential" to the Tower of London and a nearby listed church, helping to appease the heritage bodies. It has also received positive comments from the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment (CABE).
I must be the only one who actually likes the building thats there at the moment(except for the top bit), i love the way the glass seems to chage colour according to the sky. But another skyscraper for london is only good news, heres hoping for a design that can really justify being that close to the river.
When might there might be some renderings of the building, or a planning application?
I must be the only one who actually likes the building thats there at the moment(except for the top bit), i love the way the glass seems to chage colour according to the sky. But another skyscraper for london is only good news, heres hoping for a design that can really justify being that close to the river.
a curved tv or phone? im not liking the sound of this and im just not gonna get too excited, doesn't seem London is reaching the skies with its current proposed/approved biggies... so i'll be all reserved for now (oh how british )
It looks as if it may be out on its ownsome, away from the very compact main cluster.
Also, i quite like the building that is there at the moment, its a fairly unoffensive 1960's building. There are many uglier monstrosities that i would rather see replaced. I think we should try and keep reasonaly good buildings from all era's in london. We dont want all the modern buildings in the city to be stainless stell and glass
And i REALLY hate plantation place, the cladding may well be high quality, but i couldnt give a rats ass how much it cost, because it looks so goddamned banal and dull. it is an ugly, hulking great lump of a building that looks totally squashed into a site that it too small for it, and from a distance it looks like a huge wall of green glass, paying no regard to surrounding buildings or skyline
It looks as if it may be out on its ownsome, away from the very compact main cluster.
Also, i quite like the building that is there at the moment, its a fairly unoffensive 1960's building. There are many uglier monstrosities that i would rather see replaced. I think we should try and keep reasonaly good buildings from all era's in london. We dont want all the modern buildings in the city to be stainless stell and glass
And i REALLY hate plantation place, the cladding may well be high quality, but i couldnt give a rats ass how much it cost, because it looks so goddamned banal and dull. it is an ugly, hulking great lump of a building that looks totally squashed into a site that it too small for it, and from a distance it looks like a huge wall of green glass, paying no regard to surrounding buildings or skyline
Your confusing it with Palestra. Now thats a big lump of glass.
I agree with the comments about keeping the better buildings from the 60's. And 20 Fenchurch is perhaps one of the best from that era IMO. This design better be good, otherwise we could end up with something worse, that will date very quickly, and will be harded to demolish in the future
I must be the only one who actually likes the building thats there at the moment(except for the top bit), i love the way the glass seems to chage colour according to the sky. But another skyscraper for london is only good news, heres hoping for a design that can really justify being that close to the river.
When might there might be some renderings of the building, or a planning application?
You are not alone. Despite it's great to hear about news of new buildings (specially if they are designed by architects such as Viñoly), they could first demolish the low-rises!
Your confusing it with Palestra. Now thats a big lump of glass.
I agree with the comments about keeping the better buildings from the 60's. And 20 Fenchurch is perhaps one of the best from that era IMO. This design better be good, otherwise we could end up with something worse, that will date very quickly, and will be harded to demolish in the future
I do worry over how this skyline is going to emerge as reality.. it seems that developments are getting just a wee bit too much of a 'novelty'.. It needs more midrises before we through up a load of misc 200m towers...it will just look daft I think.
I hope time proves me wrong n eases the worries.
This is an older thread, you may not receive a response, and could be reviving an old thread. Please consider creating a new thread.
Related Threads
?
?
?
?
?
SkyscraperCity Forum
139.4M posts
1.1M members
Since 2002
A truly global community dedicated to skyscrapers, cities, urban development, and the metropolitan environment. Join us to share news, views and fun about architecture, construction, transport, skylines, and much more!