SkyscraperCity Forum banner

100 Bishopsgate | City of London | 172m | 40 fl

Tags
london
1M views 3K replies 462 participants last post by  leew1974 
#1 ·
I think a new thread is needed for this one as the news has now been confirmed by the Financial Times:

Great Portland in plan for soaring 40-storey City tower
By Jim Pickard, Property Correspondent
Published: May 25 2006 03:00 | Last updated: May 25 2006 03:00

Great Portland Estates, the London property group, is poised to submit a planning application this summer for a soaring 40-storey tower in the heart of the City.



Subscription required to read the full story. No doubt GPE is serious about this project. It is a top property developer like Land Sec. and British Land.

Herebelow the story posted by Willjfox04 earlier this year:

The skyscraper, designed by architects Allies and Morrison, would join a cluster of proposed towers in a small area of the Square Mile. Allies & Morrison are reported to be planning a 43-storey skyscraper on a site neighbouring Foster's SwissRe tower. If confirmed, this would be the 30th proposal over 500ft for London. Architect Allies and Morrison is planning a £200m development including a tower that could go next to Foster and Partners' Swiss Re building in the City of London. The architect has worked with consultant Gardiner & Theobald to draw up plans for a 43-storey tower on a site that includes 61 St Mary Axe. Foster's 41-storey tower is located at 30 St Mary Axe. The developer, Great Portland Estates, has combined a number of its land holdings in the City to produce a two-acre site on which it aims to create an office and retail development. As well as 61 St Mary Axe, Great Portland also has holdings on nearby sites at Bishopsgate and Camomile Street.
 
See less See more
1
#1,675 ·
Shoosh! Don't give Brookfield ideas. The thought of value engineering on a building so prominent and finely detailed would be disastrous. Although this has been suggested for the Pinnacle, but not sure if the design process has resorted to the original cladding. Totally perplexed by what, if anything, is to happen with so much hesitation and differing stories about the structure. Not even sure if the Pinnacle will ever get restarted.
 
#1,677 ·
^^
Yeah, I agree. Except it's not your average "boring" one. It's trying lamely to be a bit different with that stupid angular thing. What the City really needs is some New York style boxes. For some reason London can't seem to do those (Canary Wharf being the only exemption... though even they haven't built one in years and the ones they have got are height-restricted).
 
#1,680 ·
It looks like we're unlikely to see any more large scale schemes after the current proposals in this part of London any time soon anyway. Most potential for tall buildings is on the edge of The City - City Road, Shoreditch area. The Pinnacle and 100 BS may never even get built. The City seem to discourage large buildings too. This area seems destined to be a small scale cluster, unless they start building residential towers between here and Shoreditch/Islington. Canary Wharf/Wood Wharf is by far the most promising place for skyscrapers with a genuine large cluster and skyline. I think developers would love to build residential skyscrapers in a central area with lots of workers willing to pay for apartments close to work. This could see huge regeneration in The City, unless St Paul's sightlines get in the way.
 
#1,681 ·
The City itself would never allow much residential. It's own power structure depends on a low residential population - if it got too high then the current way of electing which is largely based on businesses not people would be forced to end. More likely is that more residential schemes will pop up close to the City in Hackney, Islington, Tower Hamlets and even possibly Camden, as well as just across the river.

In terms of clusters, I wouldn't be surprised if the City became the third cluster in terms of numbers of tall buildings after Isle of Dogs and Vauxhall in about a decade when projects in these locations are largely complete.
 
#1,683 ·
The city sees plenty of regeneration through a constant pipeline of office development and the several hundred thousand people that work here have plenty of money to spend on goods and services there.

There are plenty of desirable places on the city fringes for people to live and socialise.
 
#1,685 · (Edited)
I often hear Londoner's complaining about the angular boxes in NYC, and it's true, much of Manhattan is made up of uninspired shapes, but one thing that struck me when I've vistited was that each box had its own charm and character.

There's a lot of variation with the materials that they've used and some are approaching 100 years old, so are looking tired but, to me, that adds to the appeal.



I mean, look at the state of this thing:



This is absolutely wonderful in my eyes, and just oozes style and sophistication despite needing a good clean.

I just wish that developers and architects could use slightly more imagination and give us something other than a steel and glass tower for a change.

That's why I'm a big fan of Minster Court, which is often derided but I love its art deco style.



I prefer the old Stock Exchange building before the reclad, and was dismayed to learn that One Angel Court faces the same fate.

Apologies for going off topic, I got a bit carried away there...
 
#1,686 ·
I would hate to see a lot of stark square boxes in the City. It is not big or robust enough to take on anything of the style you can see in North America, Asia and Australia. The Aviva is the best of that style in the financial district and I wouldn't want to see many more, which would obliterate the more refined styles of church spires, columns and the narrow, winding street pattern. If [when] 100 Bishopsgate takes off, it will be, hopefully, the only squat, square(ish) tower but it is sufficiently distant from the inner City core not to be overwhelming or intimidating - and its askew shape makes it slightly more interesting than a simple box.
 
#1,688 ·
If [when] 100 Bishopsgate takes off, it will be, hopefully, the only squat, square(ish) tower but it is sufficiently distant from the inner City core not to be overwhelming or intimidating - and its askew shape makes it slightly more interesting than a simple box.
Although The Pinnacle wont be overwhelmed by it the pathetic spire of the Heron tower certainly will. This currently looks bad enough against even the slimmish Natwest Tower!
 
#1,690 ·
Always thought this one was a bit boring and ungainly the way it flares out at the base and turns into a plain box at the top, but after working in Tokyo for the last month they have something similar here and it's turned out being one of my favourites. Looks great from street level. Sorry 100 bishopsgate I take it all back
 
#1,693 ·
Something like that would be beautiful IMO , although as it is not rectilinear I'm sure it would provoke the usual reaction of 'it looks like Disney land' or ' we need more fillers' from a lot of Londoners. Many people can't even get their head around the pinnacle. Sometimes I think london is just not ready for this kind of architecture
 
#1,699 ·
looking at that model, I wish they'd put a twist in this somewhere around the first dozen floors so that at street level, it follows the wonky street layout, but seen from a distance / above the surrounding low/mid-rise, it aligns grid-like with heron tower.
 
#1,707 ·
That makes sense, the black sections are nice and glossy, should look good, although how long the white stays white down London Wall remains to be seen
 
Top