London SE1 community website

Another 'landmark' building

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 Next
Current: 2 of 3
Sunday 12 April 2015 7.16pm
In China, developers don't always seem to get their way.
Sunday 19 April 2015 9.55am
For some reason I missed this post on China.
Inspired me to take up a similar position if QH is threatened again. Developers take note.

Came across this article on the London skyline, and the money madness that is gripping the greedy. Many of these will stand empty just like the ones we see now.
Familiar stuff to readers on SE1, so we need to speak up while we still can.

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-3032452/More-200-tower-blocks-planned-London-s-skyline.html
Sunday 19 April 2015 7.00pm
Build it and they will come. Perhaps it's time to tell people London is full and they can't come to live here. Or if your family expands beyond the property available; take this into consideration when family planning. I know that sounds like a childish response but if we are not careful, the City will become a very unpleasant place to live and work. There's some lovely areas of Britain that are not being spoiled just because people want to live there. Villages are preserved, some town centres are preserved, why does the heart of London need to go up, up, up when it can go out, out, out.
Monday 20 April 2015 1.48pm
I went to see the Helen Mirren film Woman in Gold yesterday. It is partly set in Los Angeles and I was struck by the aerial views which displayed most of the city area as low rise with the high buildings grouped in the centre. I have never been to Los Angeles and assumed that it was a kind of West Coast equivalent of Manhattan. In fact the authorities there seem to have used a sensible measure of judgement and control. I realised this was the case in (say) Paris but Los Angeles....?

Do these qualities of judgement and control exist any more in London? I have always regarded London as the greatest city in the world and am proud to live in SE1 but "they" are destroying it before our eyes. Who are "they"? Developers of course - but who would expect anything else from them. Who is supposed to control the developers? Borough Councils? Desperate to find money from somewhere as they take the main burden of government squeeze and bullied into regarding any increase in Council Tax as a complete no-no, they are in thrall to the developers. The Mayor of London? Ken Livingstone had a fetish for high buildings and Boris has inherited this and taken it to new extremes. Does anyone know of any skyscraper appeal application whatsoever that he has turned down?

Of course high buildings are an inevitable element in any great city but they should be GROUPED - such as Canary Wharf and the City of London - not sprouting up anywhere and everywhere, leaving us petty residents "walking under their huge legs" (with apologies to Shakespeare).

The fact that so many of the buildings will be so little occupied is the icing on the cake.

Is there nothing we can do about this appalling situation?
Monday 20 April 2015 2.06pm
nelson_ wrote:
You are forgetting "touchstone building" which was used (by Southwark planners) to justify the height of the Music Box building in Union Street.
Apparently it means that tourists can navigate between Southwark tube station and Tate Modern using this 14-storey tower as a "touchstone".

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/news/view/7681

Yeah, the orange lampposts saying "TATE MODERN" obviously won't be enough.

And the direction: "Turn left at the first set of lights/first crossroads/just past the theatre/opposite the Union Jack" is positively confusing compared to "Turn left at The Music Box".

Thank heavens for landmark buildings.

...if you press it, they will come.
Monday 20 April 2015 2.48pm
I am currently quite enjoying the 'vista' opened up as a result of the demolition of Brandon House. Being able to see a wide expanse of sky there above relatively low-rise buildings (looking west) and more open aspect down Marshalsea Road is surprising and refreshing. It won't last long of course, and there will be a new, higher building of little architectural merit going up soon. Just don't call it an 'iconic landmark'.
Monday 20 April 2015 3.09pm
I think they mean "moronic landmark" rather than "iconic landmark"
Monday 20 April 2015 5.37pm
Ivanhoe wrote:

Yeah, the orange lampposts saying "TATE MODERN" obviously won't be enough.

And the direction: "Turn left at the first set of lights/first crossroads/just past the theatre/opposite the Union Jack" is positively confusing compared to "Turn left at The Music Box".

Thank heavens for landmark buildings.

Just another cynical example how visitors to the area matter more to Southwark Council than long time residents of the area.The visitors won't oppose to the magnificent plans of our council. And then there are the "transient" residents in student halls and hostels, whose loss of light does not matter (in the Barratt's tower case)
Monday 20 April 2015 6.26pm
Since they demolished the Heygate I can see all the way to Wansey Street, however the Elephant Park building has completely blocked my bedroom window view and the 1 The Elephant building has stolen my view of Battersea and Clapham...firework night ruined. Hey ho, it's called progress....
Monday 20 April 2015 10.38pm
It's not just losing light and views that's a problem: I've started taking photographic evidence of the suns reflection from some of these tall buildings. I find I am getting blinded by this reflection on a regular basis when I walk into my living room.
Pages:  Previous1 2 3 Next
Current: 2 of 3

To post a message, please log in or register..
February at a glance
Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from:

We are part of
Independent Community News Network
Email newsletter

For the latest local news and events direct to your inbox every Monday, you need our weekly email newsletter SE1 Direct.

7,000+ locals read it every week. Can you afford to miss out?

Read the latest issue before signing up

Also on the forum
Views expressed in this discussion forum are those of the contributors and may not reflect the editorial policy of this website. Please read our terms and conditions