Lime Street Square | City of London | 190m | 40 fl | Approved

[Loathing]

Most of Tokyo's buildings in the high profile financial sector around Tokyo Station are clad in stone of one sort of another. But they still have very large windows, so the difference between a stone clad and curtain glazed building is rather small from a distance. They need large windows because they need large, cost efficient floor-plates, with as much light as possible. Also, large windows offer great views which are uplifting for the workers and also enhance the prestige of the firm in the eyes of visitors. I can't see many firms begging for smaller windows on their skyscrapers at any point in the future.

[delores]

Yes but the problem I see with large windows is that most of the time because of glare the blinds are down, the argument that they need so much light is a bit of fallacy. Although not much of a fan of Make architects at least they are reducing the glazing on their buildings so you actually have variation. Glass curtain walling In the end gives us yet more modernistic visual poverty it is tedious and that's why I find this building lazy boring and predictable in the way its been clad.

[Loathing]

Curtain glazing is quite boring but it's usually harmless. You can't deny that such buildings offer spectacular views from the inside; and from the outside their reflectiveness fills canyon-streets with light; and on the skyline they're almost seamless, which means they're rarely offensive. They're almost always an improvement on the clunky, plasticky architecture of the mid/late 20th c. that they replace.

[Ebeneezer_Goode]

Indeed. I would take a sea of glass over a concrete jungle any day.

[Bob!]

Who was talking about concrete?
I totally agree with delores, The variety of colours and materials in London's skyline is not very wide, there's too much glass. That's why for example Heron Plaza with its copper cladding is very important for the cityscape in my opinion.
In order to add variety a tower clad with natural stone would have been good for this site, maybe something along the lines of Opernturm.

[potto]

you really don't understand the pressures of building tall here. I'm assuming you are merely talking about the local mini-cluster in the City rather than anything wider when you say too much glass; the wider City or London skyline is anything but!

St Pauls and more recently the Tower of London is the pressure in the City, if the City is to build tall then it must retain St Pauls as an eye-catching focal point. The use of viewing corridors such as from Fleet street gives this new tower proposal its slant shape as well as 133 Leadenhall being built next door.

Glass and metallic finishes of tall buildings help keep St Pauls standing out from longer distance views where they will inevitably merge together. Glass and metallic finishes form a more subtle interaction with the sky where colours and shades change depending on light and weather. Compare the relative (no where near perfect) success of the current cluster as a backdrop with the West view of St Pauls compare to the view looking North with the heavy solid textured concrete backdrop of the Barbican... the grime and stains of the darkened concrete works better with the newly cleaned St Pauls stone.

[BelgiumKanarie]

This building just need to be build!

[dom]

"Yes but the problem I see with large windows is that most of the time because of glare the blinds are down, the argument that they need so much light is a bit of fallacy"

I can count the number of times I've needed to use the blinds at my office in London last year on two hands! Unfortunately it's hardly ever bright enough and sunny at the right time of the day to necessitate pulling the blinds down on our building!!

: (

[cnapan]

Just had a read through this thread, and whoever it was who pointed out the miserable nature of the square in front of the Aviva building, I completely agree.

Now is probably not the time to redo it given the massive building site on one side, but it's a huge opportunity to create a stunning focal point, and with all that money floating around, there's really no reason to make do with that desolate plaza any more.

Also, Can I just point out how important to the streetscape the presence of that church is?

[steppenwolf]

Another soulless factory for people to commute to and from. It's the same old formula - come up with a form that annoys the fewest people by stepping out of all the heritage views, skin it with glass et voila. So very unimaginative and ungenerous for one of the most important places in London.

The city is turning into a pile of clashing shades of glass expanse, without human scale or reference to context. We don't need to get excited by every little tall proposal if it clearly isn't any good. We can be more demanding! There are so many amazing ways to clad a building and so many better ways to come up with a form.

Imagine how completely rubbish it'll look coming down Fleet Street and seeing St. Pauls with Leadenhall leaning away to the left and this to the right... I cringe to think of it.

I hope the planners send this cheap, shoddy and obvious building back to the drawing board and demand something much much better (and for those who don't believe such improvements can be achieved, take a look at the Tate Modern extension) .

Too many short-term decisions are being made in the City of London that are ruining it for generations to come and will probably result in it losing its status as a special place to do business.

[DarJoLe]

Nope.

[Loathing]

I think this one is a bit of a masterstroke! The way each of it's 'facets' faces and reflects one of its neighbours. And the way it physically mirrors 122 Leadenhall to create a valley. Instead of NYC's concrete canyons, we can have a vitrified valley!

Besides, the metal 'border' or edges give it a sharpness that's very unique. It'll cut quite a different dash on the skyline to any other building in London. If the finnish is up to scratch, it'll fulfill what many people wanted of the Shard: a dagger-like profile with an icy clarity.

[gothicform]

Originally Posted by steppenwolf

Another soulless factory for people to commute to and from. It's the same old formula - come up with a form that annoys the fewest people by stepping out of all the heritage views, skin it with glass et voila. So very unimaginative and ungenerous for one of the most important places in London.

The city is turning into a pile of clashing shades of glass expanse, without human scale or reference to context. We don't need to get excited by every little tall proposal if it clearly isn't any good. We can be more demanding! There are so many amazing ways to clad a building and so many better ways to come up with a form.

Imagine how completely rubbish it'll look coming down Fleet Street and seeing St. Pauls with Leadenhall leaning away to the left and this to the right... I cringe to think of it.

I hope the planners send this cheap, shoddy and obvious building back to the drawing board and demand something much much better (and for those who don't believe such improvements can be achieved, take a look at the Tate Modern extension) .

Too many short-term decisions are being made in the City of London that are ruining it for generations to come and will probably result in it losing its status as a special place to do business.

agree entirely. well said. i find it simply meh and think it lacks any "wow" factor. leadenhall has "it", this does not.

[gegloma01]

PW: The City of London will see another new skyscraper rise over the next few years, after its planning committee recommended “Scalpel” for approval

[lumberjack]

Fantastic news

http://www.propertyweek.com/news/%E2...048267.article

[LondonKid]

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/news.php?ref=3228

[CarMadMike]

The above article mentions that this will be the new HQ for WR Berkely, does this mean that we won't have to wait for more tenders before construction begins? Or does a certain percentage have to be taken before they begin?

Thanks!

[Whittonstall]

This was always pretty much nailed on to get planning but still nice to see it confirmed. I don't really understand all of the recent criticism of this building. People have to accept that not every new high-rise will be an architectural gem. Perhaps people have been spoiled a little in this part of the city. IMO this will be a fine addition to the skyline - looking forward to seeing it rise.

[thatmfeeling]

So happy!!!

[london lad]

Its not been approved yet just a certain other website has lifted news again without reading things right.

It s recommended for approval by the planning office and then has to be signed off by the Mayors office