daily menu » rate the banner | guess the city | one on oneforums map | privacy policy (aug.2, 2013) | DMCA policy | flipboard magazine

Go Back   SkyscraperCity > European Forums > UK & Ireland Architecture Forums > Projects and Construction > London Metro Area > Speakers' Corner

Speakers' Corner For London related discussion



Reply

 
Thread Tools
Old May 20th, 2008, 12:38 AM   #161
Zim Flyer
Rock Lord
 
Zim Flyer's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2004
Location: Blackpool
Posts: 12,831
Likes (Received): 32

Quote:
Originally Posted by potto View Post
but a strong mayor with vision could bring it back into line a bit like what Ken did with Crossrail ho hum
Boris could and should lead the fightback.

As I mentioned in the crossrail thread, I would advice Londoners to study the Manchester Evening News campaign over the cancelled Metrolink project, they even organised a concert. It was backed up by civil and political party's and took two years of none stop pressure to reverse the decision.

That is what London needs to do, make as much noice as possible and squeaze Alistair Darlings pips.
Zim Flyer no está en línea   Reply With Quote

Sponsored Links
 
Old May 20th, 2008, 01:33 AM   #162
JGG
LONDON - Westminster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,841
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by london lad View Post
Sorry JGG- Mr Milton has been against every skyscraper proposed for central London, Westminster has tried to stop all the towers in the city including the pinnacle because they slightly stick out in certain views (when not obscured by trees that is).
London lad, I agree with a lot of the points in your post but is too negative IMO. For instance, Simon Milton is OK with a mini-cluster around Paddington basin. It is just one example, one I am aware of, but I think that when confronted with economic and social issues he is willing to listen. OK, he comes from the other side of the spectrum, but that does not mean he is "in se" against skyscrapers. He is an intelligent man and he included some very progressive people in his committee. However, a skyscraper backdrop for Buckingham Palace or Westminster Palace is not going to happen under him. I am happy for that. Indicative will he how Beetham is handled. Architecturally, Doon street should be stopped but there are some valid arguments for Beetham (as you remember I was very much opposed intitially but you provided some convincing arguments). The issue from my opinion (and the risk) I see with Simon Milton is that he will not address the real issue of a lot a buildings that contribute positively to their surroundings being lost for some average developments, examples being the EH headquarters, the Middlesex Hospital entrance, the Crown Estate Regent's Street scheme, etc. OK, from your perspective that is me being conservative again...
JGG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 01:43 AM   #163
JGG
LONDON - Westminster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,841
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by DarJoLe View Post
These are basically all the towers still going through the planning process that aren't in the City or Canary Wharf.

So basically there won't be any other proposals or planning approvals for towers outside of these areas anymore.
Incorrect IMO. However no clusters as immediate backdrop for major monuments that are not yet "compromised" in this respect. Not sure it preserves these areas better if instead poor groundscrapers are allowed, but anyway, that is my reading, for what it is worth. I think under Boris a strong argument should be and could be made for a cluster on the south bank (E&C, Blackfriars Rd). As long as it does not pop up above Westminster Palace I think they will not be overly worried about it. It delivers a good bit of regeneration and let's not forget Boris desperately wants to look progressive in some respects. The choice is for everybody to work with him or just moan about him.
JGG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 01:54 AM   #164
JGG
LONDON - Westminster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,841
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by potto View Post
but a strong mayor with vision could bring it back into line a bit like what Ken did with Crossrail ho hum
I would not be so worried about this... it looks like anoter spectacular Brown own goal in the making. It will allow Boris to emerge as the new leader of London, uniting left, right and centre, taking on the evil Gordon Brown. First some more press about Brown being eager to kill off Crossrail is required. Watch my word!
JGG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 10:46 AM   #165
Octoman
Just Relax
 
Octoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,422
Likes (Received): 1823

I wonder if Brown naively thinks that he can delay crossrail for a couple of years and let Johnson take the heat - and in so doing discredit the Tories by association?

If he does he is wrong. In fact it would be a spectacular own goal. Cameron would back Crossrail and promise to work with Boris on its delivery if elected.

In fact the more I think about it the more I am sure that this cant be true. It would be political suicide (again). Brown surely is a bit more savvy than that?
Octoman está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 11:08 AM   #166
pricemazda
King of Wishful Thinking
 
pricemazda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lincoln, EU
Posts: 17,566
Likes (Received): 623

What part of the issue isn't with the government do you people not understand?

The funding crisis comes from the Mayor of London, not the government, the government hasn't changed its funding package.

What has changed is bringing Metronet in house to TFL.

Octoman, Boris didn't even bother to turn up to vote for Crossrail. I don't know how you Tories keep squaring the circle of matching spending committments, cutting taxes and cutting borrowing.

Besides, Brown needs London to win, why do you think they suddenly found the money, Crossrail won't be cancelled because of the government.

But I realise we are now in the territory that people will blame the government for everything and credit it with nothing.
__________________
In Brussels no one hears you scream
pricemazda no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 11:25 AM   #167
Octoman
Just Relax
 
Octoman's Avatar
 
Join Date: Nov 2006
Location: London
Posts: 21,422
Likes (Received): 1823

Nothing is ever this governments fault eh?
Its not as if they are the ultimate authority in charge of the country - including the provision and delivery of public transport.
Octoman está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 11:27 AM   #168
pricemazda
King of Wishful Thinking
 
pricemazda's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: Lincoln, EU
Posts: 17,566
Likes (Received): 623

You are putting words into my mouth.

But you can't seem to grasp this concept, the funding from the government is secure. It is the funding gap from the Mayor of London's office that could cause the scheme to collapse.

Doesn't the Mayor's office have overall control of transport in the capital?
__________________
In Brussels no one hears you scream
pricemazda no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 20th, 2008, 11:36 AM   #169
london lad
Registered User
 
london lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 8,596
Likes (Received): 364

JGG- Although Westminster did allow the resi tower at Paddington this was only because they had already given consent for an office tower of the same height so would have looked a little silly if they refused the newer proposal. You could say this shows they are not anti highrise but I remember the original plans for Paddington Basin which included 2x 40-50 storey towers by Grimshaw & Rogers. The main reason they were cancelled was because Westminster & the royal parks thought they ruined the tranquility of Hyde Park as they would be seen from within it. They used an image of the park but in that same image was all the 1970's towers such as the Hyde Park barracks tower which made a nonsense of their argument. Paddington Basin went from being an ambitious destination around a long neglected lock to the rather bland, wouldn't know it existed business park it is today.

Renzo Piano is working on a resi tower in the area so it will be interesting to see what Wesminster & the Mayors office thinks of it & whether it gets nipped in the bud.

Fair enough Westminster for example has many conservation areas & listed buildings which nobody wants to demolish but they do not allow modern architecture to sit amongst this , instead we usually get bland developments built to be almost invisible that IMO cheapens the area as they are generally not up to the standard of the older buildings.

Wasn't it Sir Simon Milton who said a few months back London should be proposing exciting architecture like they have in NY & Melbourne. So far the Mayors office main thrust & comments on housing & planning is Highrise=evil & should be stopped & we should all live in twee bungalows with a garden. Not exactly progressive policies for a large city such as London.
london lad está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2008, 09:41 PM   #170
london lad
Registered User
 
london lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 8,596
Likes (Received): 364

Sparks fly over Boris' coterie of deputy mayors

* Published: 21 May 2008 12:10
* Author: Richard Vaughan

Mayor of London Boris Johnson has claimed that his recently appointed deputy mayor, Ian Clements, will make crucial 'executive' decisions on planning.

The news has sparked outrage from opposition parties in the London Assembly, and Johnson has added fuel to the fire by stating there will be further appointments of deputy mayors.

According to the Green Party, Johnson has claimed the 'more deputy mayors, the merrier', and also added that he 'can't be expected to dot the "i"s and cross the "t"s of all planning decisions'.

Green Party London Assembly member Jenny Jones said: 'Londoners expect the person who they elected as Mayor to make major decisions on planning himself and not leave these to an unelected, unaccountable appointee.

'If Mayor Johnson is so overstretched, then why is he taking on a £250,000 contract to write a regular column for the Daily Telegraph?'

Jones added that the mayor will be expected to take 'hugely controversial' decisions to meet the housing demands of the capital.

'These are huge, strategic planning decisions affecting the building of tens of thousands of homes and offices,' she said. 'These will give rise to major community campaigns involving hundreds or even thousands of people.

'The decision-making process should be transparent and that means Londoners need to be clear who is making the final decision,' Jones added.
london lad está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2008, 09:54 PM   #171
r-g-b
Registered User
 
r-g-b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 181
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
What has changed is bringing Metronet in house to TFL.
This is the direct responsibility of Gordon Brown, the was the architect of the disasterious FPI Deal.
r-g-b no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 21st, 2008, 10:25 PM   #172
JGG
LONDON - Westminster
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 2,841
Likes (Received): 1

Quote:
Originally Posted by r-g-b View Post
This is the direct responsibility of Gordon Brown, the was the architect of the disasterious FPI Deal.
... and as well of Ken Livingstone, who underestimated the cost of bringing Metronet back in house. I am not talking about covering the accumulated Metronet deficit, I am talking about future expenditure. Whilst Livingstone thought TfL could do the tube upgrade in a more cost effective way, it now appears these savings are minimal.

Yet, I rather see some of the tube upgrade being delayed and Crossrail going ahead as scheduled than the other way around. And just like in Paris, one should close lines for an extended period of time and do the upgrade at a fraction of the cost. Just look at the Central Line: it took them 10 years to upgrade the complete line and they are still working on the stations. They could probably have done all of this for a small part of the final budget had they closed the line for 12 to 18 months in 1993. And today we would have had something of much higher quality.
JGG no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 22nd, 2008, 01:47 PM   #173
r-g-b
Registered User
 
r-g-b's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 181
Likes (Received): 0


I agree, but I doubt it would have have gone down well with travelling public.

Just look at the fuss that was kicked up by people when TLF announced the closure of Sheppard's bush station.
r-g-b no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 23rd, 2008, 10:32 PM   #174
london lad
Registered User
 
london lad's Avatar
 
Join Date: Feb 2003
Location: London
Posts: 8,596
Likes (Received): 364

Johnson snubs planning role

23 May 2008

The Green Party has slammed London mayor Boris Johnson for giving his unelected deputy, Ian Clements, delegated powers to make planning decisions.

During his first mayor’s question time on Wednesday, Johnson said: “[I] can’t be expected to dot the Is and cross the Ts on all planning decisions.” Clements, a former leader of Bexley Council, was made deputy mayor with responsibility for government relations by Johnson earlier this month.

Green Party assembly member Jenny Jones said: “Londoners expect the person they elected as mayor to make major decisions on planning himself, not leave them to an unelected, unaccountable appointee. If the mayor is so overstretched, why is he taking on a £250,000 contract to write a regular column for the Daily Telegraph?”

Johnson insisted he was taking a “keen” interest in planning decisions. “In so far as I have delegated planning to others to get on with the vital business of planning approvals, that does not mean for one moment that I have ceded authority,” he said.
london lad está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2008, 03:02 PM   #175
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,420
Likes (Received): 1315

Is anyone else here finding the phrase 'Boris Effect' particularly nauseating?
potto está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 25th, 2008, 03:03 PM   #176
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,420
Likes (Received): 1315

Quote:
Originally Posted by london lad View Post
Johnson snubs planning role

23 May 2008

The Green Party has slammed London mayor Boris Johnson for giving his
Wow we have been stiched up royally by the Conservatives. This is just them trying to destroy the role of the Mayor bascially.
potto está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2008, 02:05 PM   #177
DarJoLe
Registered User
 
DarJoLe's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 16,783
Likes (Received): 1447

Semi-Detached: It's no fun in the shadow of a city skyscraper
Last Updated: 12:01am BST 29/05/2008

The battle for London's skyline is about to commence, says Max Davidson

How many more skyscrapers can London take? Are we skyscrapered out or is there room for a few more? Would another 20-storey hotel look good on Park Lane? Is the City looking thin on top? Does the view from Primrose Hill need sexing up? Or should we all be thinking small is beautiful and reverting to thatched cottages?

These are not questions that normally get asked. In a successful, congested city, the obvious place to build is up. One highrise building begets another high-rise building, like characters in the Old Testament.

advertisement

Parts of the London skyline may look like a set of cheap dentures, but what is the alternative? More and more suburbia? If we want to rival thriving cities such as New York and Tokyo, we have to look like New York and Tokyo. QED. The case for the skyscraper is formidable.

At least this year we are in for a proper debate. In one of his first moves as mayor, Boris Johnson announced that he would review the London Plan, which includes provisions on building heights. Ken Livingstone was rather keen on skyscrapers. Boris is not so sure.

He has appointed a critic of tall buildings, Sir Simon Milton, leader of Westminster City Council, as his senior planning adviser. There will not be a revolution. Boris is more Restoration fop than Robespierre. But there could well be a sea change.

Some developers, naturally, are twitchy about the turn of events. Size matters in property: the higher you build, the more money you make, so a presumption against high-rise buildings would hit developers where it hurts. There will be some battles royal at local level, particularly in affluent western boroughs such as Kensington & Chelsea, where there are some high-density planning applications pending.

But it is good that battle has been joined, and it is also good, judging from the noises emanating from City Hall, that the battlefields will be local, with the mayor signalling that he is likely to leave most planning issues to individual boroughs, and not act as cheerleader for developers.

It cannot be said often enough that it is residents - the people who have to wake up in the morning and see skyscrapers shooting up outside their bedroom windows - whose opinions should be regarded as paramount. Someone working on the 15th floor of a high-rise building just thinks: "What fun! A view to enjoy when I'm feeling bored!" It is a different story when you are looking up, not down.

There are skyscrapers and skyscrapers, of course. I will never warm to Canary Wharf, but the Gherkin brings a smile to my face every time I see it. Parts of the City exude the sort of excitement - shiny new structures soaring into the sky - that one associates with New York.

But we shouldn't ignore the other side of the equation: how intimidating high-rise buildings can be for those who have to live in their shadow.

Skyscrapers are the architectural equivalent of loud music - fine from a distance, not so fine if you are standing right next to the speakers.
DarJoLe no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2008, 02:26 PM   #178
potto
Registered User
 
potto's Avatar
 
Join Date: Sep 2002
Location: London
Posts: 14,420
Likes (Received): 1315

does he not realise we already have laws and regulation about light level and 'over shadowing'. Putting the concept of 'views' into the argument is fucking insane! What proportion of the population spend their time sitting at their window looking out at views, especially in semi-detached suburbia! It is such a miniscule and stupidly overblown issue!!!

So another useless commentry, that pretends to be concerned about the issues of green space, says oh we love the gerkhin... but then reveals the true ignorance and bigotry... Manhatten is the only other option! Will you think of the bay window!
potto está en línea ahora   Reply With Quote
Old May 29th, 2008, 07:31 PM   #179
Zenith
Trainee Apprentice MOD
 
Zenith's Avatar
 
Join Date: Oct 2003
Location: Taunton
Posts: 7,526
Likes (Received): 865

Quote:
But we shouldn't ignore the other side of the equation: how intimidating high-rise buildings can be for those who have to live in their shadow.

Skyscrapers are the architectural equivalent of loud music - fine from a distance, not so fine if you are standing right next to the speakers.
I'm sorry I don't know anyone who is intimidated by tall high quality buildings, or any talls that overshadow whole residential streets.

Why is a tall building worse at close proximity than a low one? If the lower/ground levels are just as accessible etc then why does it matter how tall it is?

Weird statements yet again from people to seem to have some sort of 'delusion'.
__________________
'The content of your character is your choice. Day by day, what you choose, what you think, and what you do is who you become. Your integrity is your destiny ... it is the light that guides your way.'
- Heraclitus
Zenith no está en línea   Reply With Quote
Old May 30th, 2008, 12:01 AM   #180
huvet
Registered User
 
Join Date: May 2006
Posts: 218
Likes (Received): 0

Quote:
Originally Posted by potto View Post
does he not realise we already have laws and regulation about light level and 'over shadowing'. Putting the concept of 'views' into the argument is fucking insane! What proportion of the population spend their time sitting at their window looking out at views, especially in semi-detached suburbia! It is such a miniscule and stupidly overblown issue!!!

So another useless commentry, that pretends to be concerned about the issues of green space, says oh we love the gerkhin... but then reveals the true ignorance and bigotry... Manhatten is the only other option! Will you think of the bay window!
Oh dear, check out your planning history. The protected viewing corridors were established some time ago. Within them the city cluster, the pinnacle, heron. leadenhall, even the walky talky were approved. Previously Swiss re was approved and built.
The Livingstone decided to reduce the viewing corridors to help more commercial development (how very left wing).
All Boris has done is reinstate accepted viewing corridors.
The viewing corridors that the previous mayor reduced for his commercial developer friends only last year.
The laws about overshadowing, light levels and even overlooking were diluted under Prescott nationally leading to substandard housing being approved.
It is your true ignorance and bigotry which is exposed.
And should you care to leave your computer you can see St Pauls from Richmond Park.
huvet no está en línea   Reply With Quote


Reply

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



All times are GMT +2. The time now is 05:43 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.8 Beta 1
Copyright ©2000 - 2014, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.
Feedback Buttons provided by Advanced Post Thanks / Like v3.2.5 (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 DragonByte Technologies Ltd.

vBulletin Optimisation provided by vB Optimise (Pro) - vBulletin Mods & Addons Copyright © 2014 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