Letter of John Forrester, Head of London Markets, DTZ, in the FT today.
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/eaf68af6-d...0779fd2ac.html
Landmarks are more crucial than ever for LondonPublished: February 12 2008 02:00 | Last updated: February 12 2008 02:00
From Mr John Forrester.
Sir, Critics who are too quick to dismiss plans for tall buildings in London miss a vital point: London can’t stand still, it needs development to develop (“Critics take aim at planning ‘land grab’”, February 7).
New York is concerned that it could lose out further to London because more than 60 per cent of Manhattan’s office stock is over 50 years old. If this is the case, then isn’t it a logical assumption that limiting development in the City of London could result in limiting London’s, and thereby the UK's, competitiveness?
The “Gherkin” quickly became a pin-up of the London property market – landmark of London’s status as a leading world economy. Buildings need to be designed to attract workers, as well as house them. Globalisation has made firms footloose so one could argue the likes of the “Cheese grater” and the “Shard of glass” are more important than ever before – particularly as towers are traditionally well let.
While no one could doubt the history and beauty of London’s historic landmarks, both heritage and commercial buildings like the Gherkin are themselves globally renowned for their iconic status. That is why cities regularly build skyscrapers to put them on the map – the Burj Dubai and Petronas Towers are two examples among many.
If London wants to continue to attract global corporations, which create jobs and drive the economy, then we need to design attractive new buildings in appropriate locations to accommodate them. Surely, part of what makes London so appealing is both its past and its potential?