daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy | DMCA | news magazine | posting guidelines

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > World Development News Forums > General Urban Developments > DN Archives



Global Announcement

As a general reminder, please respect others and respect copyrights. Go here to familiarize yourself with our posting policy.


Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old December 18th, 2006, 03:31 AM   #61
NothingBetterToDo
Better To Do Nothing
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 10,481
Likes (Received): 13

Heron looks beautiful in that renderoid
__________________
My Pictures:
London - Amsterdam - Copenhagen - Berlin - Oslo - Bergen - Prague - Dublin
NothingBetterToDo no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
Old January 12th, 2007, 12:47 PM   #62
wjfox
Futurist
 
wjfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: L O N D O N
Posts: 38,334
Likes (Received): 13284

I can't believe what I'm reading in the UK forum this morning.

It sounds like this project is in danger of being cancelled.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...&postcount=357
wjfox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:18 PM   #63
wjfox
Futurist
 
wjfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: L O N D O N
Posts: 38,334
Likes (Received): 13284

From the Independent. The final paragraph gives some hope -


UN threatens to put Tower of London on danger list

By Terry Kirby, Chief Reporter

Unesco is threatening to place the Tower of London on its list of endangered World Heritage Sites because of the number of skyscrapers being planned for the surrounding area.

The fortress, which William the Conqueror started building in 1078 to dominate London, would be the only building in the developed world on the endangered list.

The Department for Culture, Media and Sport has got until the end of the month to demonstrate to the UN agency's World Heritage Committee why the Tower of London should not be included on the list. It is expected to say that the correct planning procedures were followed for the proposed developments.

These include the 306-metre-high "Shard of Glass" tower planned for London Bridge, which will be Britain's tallest building. Although plans for a second tower, the 200-metre Minerva building, have been scaled down, two other proposed buildings, a 324-metre high Bishopsgate tower and a 209-metre building at 20 Fenchurch Street, have also raised alarm at Unesco.

The World Heritage Committee said last year that it noted "with great concern" the proposed developments which failed to respect the significance of the site and "deeply regretted" that the Government had not yet examined the impact of such developments on the Tower. It also suggested that the developments would have a wider impact, affecting other World Heritage Sites, the Houses of Parliament and Westminster Abbey.

A joint team from the World Heritage Centre and the independent International Council on Monuments and Sites subsequently visited the site. The Government has been asked to respond to the criticisms by the end of this month, and give a timetable for "corrective action".

A culture department spokesman has admitted it would not be possible to "row back" on permission for the Shard of Glass. He stressed that permission for the development was granted after a public inquiry which considered the environmental impact, adding: "Our response to these criticisms will be that our planning controls are among the most sophisticated in the world. As a result we are pretty confident we will not be placed on the danger list."

Unesco will make a final decision in June.
wjfox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:23 PM   #64
Zenith
Trainee Apprentice MOD
 
Zenith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taunton
Posts: 7,828
Likes (Received): 1537

Im utterly confused. Please can someone explain how a World Alpha city should not build tall buildings simply because it has a castle in it. Please explain because I am ******* livid with UNESCO for even bringing this up.

No you can't build that building because those NIMBYS object to it. NO you can't build it because some friggin shit authority will say it will impact (what the **** does that ******* mean) the tower of London/Tower bridge /St Pauls..

No you can't build that because of sightlines....because it will blocks views of......oh im sick of hearing it all now. No you can't build that because people may see it from a ******* park !!! How the **** does New York ******* cope then. **** off.
__________________
https://thezenithblog.wordpress.com/
Please visit my blog and any advice welcome.
Zenith no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:29 PM   #65
Avens
Registered User
 
Avens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 263
Likes (Received): 0

It'll be a ******* joke if this is cancelled. Some people need to realise this is the 21st century and stop being so ******* scared of progress. This would potentially be one of the most beautiful buildings in the world and people are trying to stop it happening. Why? Get a ******* life. The Tower of London will still be there! If this doesn't go ahead I'm going to lose faith in a large portion of the world's ability to move forward. So many people are stuck in the past. London can't just sit back and rest on it's (fantastic) past. It needs to step up and create landmarks for this era. LBT would've been the perfect start. I'll be truly devastated if this doesn't go ahead.
__________________
You'll Never Walk Alone

Liverpool FC
Avens no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:33 PM   #66
Newcastle Guy
Registered User
 
Newcastle Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,096
Likes (Received): 317

Quote:
Originally Posted by wjfox2002 View Post
I can't believe what I'm reading in the UK forum this morning.

It sounds like this project is in danger of being cancelled.

http://www.skyscrapercity.com/showpo...&postcount=357
What Jef meant was, that Ken is under pressure to cancel the TFL letting from the conservatives, greens, UNESCO etc...

LOL do you really think HE of all people would do that though?

I think it'll be OK, it's just the court case left to go now before we focus on getting PWC out of Southwark towers
Newcastle Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:34 PM   #67
Newcastle Guy
Registered User
 
Newcastle Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,096
Likes (Received): 317

Quote:
Originally Posted by Avens View Post
LBT would've been the perfect start. I'll be truly devastated if this doesn't go ahead.
And it still will be
Newcastle Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:38 PM   #68
Avens
Registered User
 
Avens's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2006
Location: London
Posts: 263
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by Newcastle Guy View Post
And it still will be
Yeah maybe we're getting a little carried away and jumping the gun a bit. But it was looking like a certainty to be built, now it seems much more 50/50.
__________________
You'll Never Walk Alone

Liverpool FC
Avens no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 02:51 PM   #69
Newcastle Guy
Registered User
 
Newcastle Guy's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jul 2005
Location: Vancouver
Posts: 9,096
Likes (Received): 317

Indeed. I agree that this has cast some doubt over it, but some people here act as though it has just been cancelled.
Newcastle Guy no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 03:26 PM   #70
HT
Registered User
 
HT's Avatar
 
Join Date: May 2004
Location: Frankfurt (a.M.)
Posts: 360
Likes (Received): 32

Its the same thing like in Cologne !

Th unesco said if they build the announced skyscrapers the "Kölner Dom" will not be a UNESCO building anymore.

The unesco is such a f****** shit !
HT no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 03:40 PM   #71
Matthieu
Administrateur
 
Matthieu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Tarbes, the capital of the world
Posts: 15,222
Likes (Received): 5618

Quote:
Originally Posted by zenith View Post
Im utterly confused. Please can someone explain how a World Alpha city should not build tall buildings simply because it has a castle in it. Please explain because I am ******* livid with UNESCO for even bringing this up.

No you can't build that building because those NIMBYS object to it. NO you can't build it because some friggin shit authority will say it will impact (what the **** does that ******* mean) the tower of London/Tower bridge /St Pauls..

No you can't build that because of sightlines....because it will blocks views of......oh im sick of hearing it all now. No you can't build that because people may see it from a ******* park !!! How the **** does New York ******* cope then. **** off.
The UNESCO can't cancel that building. But it can remove the ToL from it's world heritage list.
__________________
"To erect a tall building is to proclaim one’s faith in the future, the skyline is a seismograph of optimism."
Jean Nouvel
Matthieu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 03:44 PM   #72
Varenukha
London, UK
 
Varenukha's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 707
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by Matthieu View Post
The UNESCO can't cancel that building. But it can remove the ToL from it's world heritage list.
This raises the question: what is the cost of defying UNESCO? It would be madness to remove the ToL from their heritage list, and it is hardly the most powerful lobbying group in the world. Is there a grant received from UNESCO for upkeep? Hardly likely! Given ToL is in such a wealthy city.
So UNESCO is getting involved. So What?
Varenukha no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 03:47 PM   #73
Matthieu
Administrateur
 
Matthieu's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2004
Location: Tarbes, the capital of the world
Posts: 15,222
Likes (Received): 5618

It would be fun if you people took the piss.
__________________
"To erect a tall building is to proclaim one’s faith in the future, the skyline is a seismograph of optimism."
Jean Nouvel
Matthieu no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 03:52 PM   #74
Huppoe
Winner
 
Huppoe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Helsinki
Posts: 33
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by HT View Post
Its the same thing like in Cologne !

Th unesco said if they build the announced skyscrapers the "Kölner Dom" will not be a UNESCO building anymore.

The unesco is such a f****** shit !
Protecting cultural environments is not "f****** shit !", you will thank them in 30 years. You can always build skyscrapers to another place but try to move Kölner Dom...
__________________
Stitches are for bitches. WEAR THE SCAR
Huppoe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 03:53 PM   #75
El_Greco
Épater la Bourgeoisie
 
El_Greco's Avatar
 
Join Date: Apr 2005
Location: London/Taipei
Posts: 19,307
Likes (Received): 8167

Quote:
Originally Posted by Varenukha View Post
It would be madness to remove the ToL from their heritage list,

Why?Would The Tower disapear if removed from heritage list?
__________________
My Travels : Barcelona|Edinburgh|Glasgow|London|Madrid|New York|Paris|Taipei|Vilnius
El_Greco no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 04:10 PM   #76
chjbolton
chjbolton
 
chjbolton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles, London, Paris, Munich
Posts: 797
Likes (Received): 75

Frankly, I think there full of crap as well, but they DID put an 'official' finger on something that a lot of people think about London:
it has build and still builds anything anywhere!!
London, however cool and great and blablabla (I agree with most of it), London is such an architectural mess!
A beautiful Victorian monument can be squeezed between a big glassy tower on one side and a shitty kebab restaurant on the other!
If you look at the skyline, it speaks for itself. We could almost start a bet about when they will build a 200 m skyscraper just in front of Big Ben.

I'm not saying UNESCO is right, and I'm not saying London should go for a Paris-style law (nothing taller than 37 meters inside the historical city), but I do hope their message it going to be heard in the future. For the sake of the London's monuments. Although it's a bit late if you ask me. Just look at St Paul's surroundings...

Canary Warf is fine! Why do they have to cram the city with new clusters everywhere?
And London is NOT like New York.
__________________
B O L T O N
chjbolton no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 04:23 PM   #77
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 19,834
Likes (Received): 6363

Quote:
Originally Posted by chjbolton View Post
London is such an architectural mess!
That's the whole point.

Why shouldn't a city mix up all its architecture and dare to place modern next to old?
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 04:38 PM   #78
wjfox
Futurist
 
wjfox's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2002
Location: L O N D O N
Posts: 38,334
Likes (Received): 13284

Quote:
Originally Posted by chjbolton View Post
London is such an architectural mess!
Of course it is, and as DarJoLe says, that's the whole point. This is what gives the city its character, and makes it such a fascinating place to explore and photograph - you're never quite sure what's around the next corner. London has an almost unrivalled variety of styles, shapes, colours, materials and designs, spanning nearly a thousand years. This creates some amazing juxtapositions and contrasts. London is a photographer's paradise.
wjfox no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 04:47 PM   #79
delahaye
Senior Member
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Location: Hammersmith
Posts: 102
Likes (Received): 2

it doesn't make a city more worth living though
delahaye no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old January 12th, 2007, 05:04 PM   #80
chjbolton
chjbolton
 
chjbolton's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Los Angeles, London, Paris, Munich
Posts: 797
Likes (Received): 75

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
That's the whole point.

Why shouldn't a city mix up all its architecture and dare to place modern next to old?


It's a point of view some people will defend.
I think it's fine if a city gathers different neighbourhoods, but mixing them all up...
I don't know. I see it more as the formation of a big gray mass, or even the 'swallowing' of certain cultures by others, more than an effective way to promote ALL those cultures.

I guess we just see cultural enhancement for a city a different way.
__________________
B O L T O N
chjbolton no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

Tags
32 london bridge street, london, london bridge tower, renzo piano, southwark, the shard, the shard of glass

Thread Tools

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Related topics on SkyscraperCity


All times are GMT +2. The time now is 04:15 AM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.11 Beta 4
Copyright ©2000 - 2017, vBulletin Solutions Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2017 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

SkyscraperCity ☆ In Urbanity We trust ☆ about us | privacy policy | DMCA policy

Hosted by Blacksun, dedicated to this site too!
Forum server management by DaiTengu