Skyscraper City Forum banner
1 - 20 of 43 Posts

·
Moderator
South East Nine
Joined
·
40,095 Posts
Discussion Starter · #1 ·
60 London Wall
City of London
EC2


Planning application:
City of London 16/00776/FULMAJ

Official website:
http://www.citygrove.com/60-london-wall


Development Facts

Developer:
LaSalle Investment Management

Architect: EPR Architects

Floors: G+11

Height: 53.550m
(AGL)

Floorspace: 43,872m²
(GIA)




 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,198 Posts
I was trying to see what it replaced, and misinterpreted the renders / geography, and thought the answer was this block, just about had a heart attack! thankfully it's the one 'behind me' there, this chap.

i dare say some will be sad to see it go. for me the new one is definitely an upgrade, though the pomo one was far from the worst of its ilk i must admit, even as a general 'hater' of that ilk.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,137 Posts
I used to work in this building, it had two atriums to let light in, which look like they will be gone in the new design. Makes me wonder if it will be even darker inside now or if the larger windows will let sufficient natural light in.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
5,397 Posts
I have never understood the mentality behind some of these redevelopments. The previous building was good with some excellent materials and much interest. Perhaps they think that some imagination in style is too much. The blander the better. Apart from stacking more floorspace, as seen here, is the answer. Hopefully they will have recycled what was there.
 

·
Moderator
Joined
·
39,175 Posts
I would have thought you couldn't get more enviromentally friendly than reusing and adapting a building.
True, reusing is always better than demolition and redevelopment. But this is still quite extensive redevelopment not long after opening of the original building. It looks like only the frame was left in place. Doing something like that on buildings which are decade or two old is not rely paragon of sustainability either...

At least the end result is decent.
 

·
Registered
Joined
·
6,137 Posts
Office space in the City is sustainable, it’s a workplace that supports city living (less energy usage per a person) and sustainable commuting (public transport, cycling, walking). It’s a bit like making the case that you are better off not replacing your 20 year old diesel Land Rover Discovery with a Tesla X because a new car consumes so much energy to produce and by keeping the old you can avoid that, this is true but it overlooks the energy savings to be gained by the Tesla.

This redevelopment has produced additional office space to keep more people in a lower carbon work life.

Sunk cost fallacy In other words.

Yes, it also shows how little we care about environment, despite all the spin and the PR about "corporate responsibility"...
 
1 - 20 of 43 Posts
Top