London SE1 community website

The truth about tall buildings

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  Previous1 2
Current: 2 of 2
Saturday 8 April 2006 12.49am
The view of St.Paul's from Parliament Hill is already ruined by Southwark Towers,New London Bridge House and Guys' in the background.The view can only be improved by removing these buildings completely or replacing them with buildings more complimentary to St.Paul's.We know they are not going to knock them down and leave it like that,so replacements it will be(except Guys').

The Shard will be an overwhelmingly huge improvement to what is currently in the background of St.Paul's at the moment....in height and aesthetics.

Beetham Tower (Blackfriars') ,if built ,won't be seen in that same view of St.Paul's from Parliament Hill.

As far as the view of Horseguards with the Eye,Doon St tower did stick out like a sore thumb.As did Beetham.The Bishopsgate tower seemed to blend into that view quite nicely though......it didn't seem to demand attention like the other 2 did and basically ruin an idyllic scene.A shame really as i quite liked both of those towers.
Saturday 8 April 2006 9.37am
dfitzzz wrote:
The Shard will be an overwhelmingly huge improvement to what is currently in the background of St.Paul's at the moment....in height and aesthetics.

I completely agree - and this pic proves it:

http://xs75.xs.to/pics/06145/parliamenthill.jpg

The Shard will complement and enhance the view, rather than 'spoiling' it.
Saturday 8 April 2006 8.00pm
There was a good article in the standard the other day,
Apparently the Minerva tower was put on indefinite hold because they couldn't sign any tenets,and the Heron Tower still has no tenents signed after four years since it had planning permission.
The article also said they may go ahead and build it anyway next year.

What good an empty building will do London I just don't know.

It's the planning polices of the loony bin.
Saturday 8 April 2006 9.37pm
But the office market in London is forecast for a major upturn in the next few years. We've just emerged from a "trough" in the property cycle, and things are improving steadily now. According to most analysts, rents are expected to peak by around 2010, so it makes sense to start building these towers now. British Land have already begun construction on 2 major schemes - the 500ft Broadgate Tower (next to Liverpool Street Station) and the 400ft Willis Building (opposite the Lloyds Building). The latter has already secured tenants. Next year they are expected to start work on the 750ft Leadenhall Building with a completion date of 2010, and there have already been companies expressing an interest in leasing space.

Minerva are a tiny company compared to British Land, and I have to say I'm not really that surprised their tower has been put on hold. Heron Tower will go ahead though, Gerald Ronson has financed the scheme already and it's being built speculatively. Likewise, the Shard at London Bridge is expected to get underway soon - they've secured a tenant for the hotel section and are reported to be in negotiations for the remaining office space too.

Who cares if the towers are empty anyway?? As long as we get a decent, modern, highrise skyline with a number of stunning iconic futuristic skyscrapers to join the Gherkin, then I'm not really that bothered :-)
Saturday 15 April 2006 10.30am
wjfox2004 wrote:
Who cares if the towers are empty anyway?? As long as we get a decent, modern, highrise skyline with a number of stunning iconic futuristic skyscrapers to join the Gherkin, then I'm not really that bothered :-)

Exactly. Also, even if the buildings are empty for a short time, they'll get filled soon enough.
Saturday 15 April 2006 11.01am
How bothered would you be if the tower was immediatiely to the south of your home, cutting off a lot of your sun and sky?
Sunday 16 April 2006 6.36pm
The Unladylike Ms. Jo wrote:
How bothered would you be if the tower was immediatiely to the south of your home, cutting off a lot of your sun and sky?

It depends where they're built. If it was in the suburbs or a rural area, where you wouldn't expect such a building, then it's worth a fuss. But in that part of London you expect this sort of thing. It's a bit like people who live near Heathrow or in its flight path when they complain about noise etc - the majority knew the airport was there when they moved in, knew what this would mean, and their employment is probably a result of the airport.

We can't live in central London, especially a part where it's been apparent for quite a few years that big things were going to happen, and then complain about the redevelopment and growth that ultimately we are a part of.
Sunday 16 April 2006 8.28pm
Most of the current residents were here decades before regeneration was dreamt of in SE1, so your analogy is not appropriate.
Monday 17 April 2006 11.25pm
Regeneration ,or greedy land grab,

The economy of the west end isn't dependent on the density of the developments.

its the effective use of a site that counts.

No to Prescotts Lap poodles!!!
Pages:  Previous1 2
Current: 2 of 2

To post a message, please log in or register..
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