But why ever not? What is there not to like about this building?zeeshanney said:i dont really like the design of this building...
This building will make a statement alright - an incredibly bold and daring architectural statement that will transform London's skyline, just as SwissRe did a couple of years ago. The incredibly futuristic design makes it look like something from the 23rd century! Combined with its height and prominent location, this building will really catch peoples' attention.zeeshanney said:i reckon something spectacular should be made to make a true statement
Have they?? Do they have a construction start date?? What exactly is preventing them going up?? I'm pretty sure I've been on threads that have explained it, but I lose track of how all the skyscraper proposals in London are progressingwjfox2002 said:They've already been approved.
Lack of tenants. Skyscrapers in London only go up if a major tenant signs up for renting the space. Broadgate Tower and Heron Tower are to be built speculatively, meaning that the developer has confidence a tenant can be found whilst construction is underway, although this can backfire as it did with One Canada Square in the early 1990s, losing the developer millions.Jack Rabbit Slim said:Have they?? Do they have a construction start date?? What exactly is preventing them going up??
RS has planning approval, NQ 1&2 haven't got planning approval yet as they haven't proved a number of issues the Mayor brought up but they will be resolved & HQ West is just a concept that hasn't been put into planning yet.NQ also has a potential delay as Crossrail ( a proposed new underground link will pass near the site & the site might be needed for site excavation etc)Jack Rabbit Slim said:then you've also got quite a few more towers at CW looking to get approval like Riverside South, North Quay tower 1, North Quay tower 2, Heron Quays West....
Have they?? Do they have a construction start date?? What exactly is preventing them going up?? I'm pretty sure I've been on threads that have explained it, but I lose track of how all the skyscraper proposals in London are progressing
obviosuly i know. but just by looking at those collages up there, it's quite unconvincing to me that the building does respond well to its surrounding. the one from bishopsgate looks particularly crude in my opinion. maybe it's really designed for that reason you mentioned but how many people everyday will actually be looking at the building that way? it's gotta be really really powerful if that's the case.DarJoLe said:It's shape isn't simply the architect saying 'ooh we've done curvy not let's do a wedge' - it's that shape for a reason, to sweep back from St Paul's Cathedral on the view from Fleet Street, a protected view of the Cathedral. It reduces its bulk on the skyline from Waterloo Bridge by tapering back to the pinnacle yet produces a dramatic sight from ground level. The design works, and will be a fantastic pinnacle to the City of London's skyline until the Bishopsgate Tower appears.