Tuesday 18 March 2003 9.36pm
The reason that a 60 storey tower is being proposed in our neck of the woods is that it can sit on top of a large transport interchange. i.e London Bridge. It's ethos, like every other tower, is to exist totally without consideration for the immediate neighbourhood. It will add nothing to the local economy.
Those who will occupy the tower are expected to commute in from outside, remain within the tower during working hours then commute home. This is completely alien to us in SE1 where we live,work,eat and drink in great restaurants,visit gallerys and theatres, shop at the market, and stroll down the river all without being tied to the constraints of timetables.
It is also a monument to conspicuous energy consumption, and such dinosaurs of the late 20th C sit uneasily in a 21st C sustainable living environment.
Of course if the developers threw in a 30m public swimming pool as planning gain then I might view it in a better light. Better still they could build some houses to enable those working in the tower to avoid commuting. ( I know it contains some residential, but not really in the price range of those who work for a living). Or how about a commitment to save Borough Market
by insisting that the necessary redevelopment of London Bridge Station
to build the Shard does not include the proposed viaduct.