HomeDiagramsDatabaseMapsForum About
     

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations


Reply

 
Thread Tools Display Modes
     
     
  #121  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 4:12 PM
jef's Avatar
jef jef is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 247
Quote:
Originally Posted by wjfox2004
But it's still a speculative build...
They are targeting 2 to 3 major occupiers of 80,000 to 150,000 sq ft each
plus floor by floor letting. Target occupiers are particularly insurance, also legal and financial.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #122  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 4:15 PM
jef's Avatar
jef jef is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 247
ground floor of Broadgate Tower:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #123  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 4:27 PM
South South is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 57
Great pictures there jef, brilliant

Here's some photo's I've recently (last few days) taken of 51 Lime St, to show you how the claddings coming about:









... and Pan Peninsula:



Reply With Quote
     
     
  #124  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 4:43 PM
jef's Avatar
jef jef is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 247
Great SE9. PP is soaring.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #125  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 5:28 PM
South South is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 57
It sure is!... The East Tower core is already half the height of these two.

Furthermore, the cladding on Limey is looking lighter than expected.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #126  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 5:55 PM
wjfox2004's Avatar
wjfox2004 wjfox2004 is offline
FutureTimeline.net
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 3,308
Brill pics SE9.
__________________
http://www.FutureTimeline.net - a timeline of future history
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #127  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 7:04 PM
wjfox2004's Avatar
wjfox2004 wjfox2004 is offline
FutureTimeline.net
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 3,308
I can't believe some of the unbelievably boring, conservative, luddite comments I read on the SE1 forum...

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/45241/page=10

If any of you guys could back me up on there, I'd be very grateful.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #128  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 7:33 PM
jef's Avatar
jef jef is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 247
I have registered and will answer tomorrow.

Regarding British Land Broadgate Expansion:

The company said that the five buildings with biggest redevelopment potential (see the buildings in RED in the rendering herebelow), namely 100 Liverpool Street, 8-12 Broadgate, 4 Broadgate, 3 Finsbury Avenue and Broadwalk House could be increased by ‘two to three times’.

That would turn these buildings in the range 20-35 storeys (?).

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #129  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 8:11 PM
South South is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 57
^
Thanks again for posting jef. If these buildings were increased by 2-3 times, they would certainly be at least 50m and taller!

Quote:
Originally Posted by wjfox2004
I can't believe some of the unbelievably boring, conservative, luddite comments I read on the SE1 forum...

http://www.london-se1.co.uk/forum/read/2/45241/page=10

If any of you guys could back me up on there, I'd be very grateful.
I've replied, and wow what a comment . I hope my reply was useful. (I'm Matt K)
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #130  
Old Posted Oct 10, 2006, 8:13 PM
BenL BenL is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: London
Posts: 57
Wow.

Will - I read though the thread on SE1 and I think you need to engage them in rational discussion rather than just post skyscraper after skyscraper and development after development which they are likely to be less interested in. It's the idea of skyscrapers they oppose and no quality of architecture will yet win them over. You need to argue for "skyscrapers in London" as a concept rather than "Bishopsgate" or "Leadenhall Building".
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #131  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2006, 10:16 AM
london lad06 london lad06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21
Hers a pic of the Rem Koolhass 10 storey HQ for Rothschild in the city of London that has gone in for planning this week. Not as tall as was initially suggested (20 storeys was mentioned) but appropriate for the area its in. This will be next door to Minervas Walbrook/Cannon St Foster designed Scheme( the curved building next to the church in this pic) which is next door to the new Foster/Nouvel Wallbrook square scheme. Quite a few big international architects literally right next door to each other.

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #132  
Old Posted Oct 13, 2006, 10:19 AM
wjfox2004's Avatar
wjfox2004 wjfox2004 is offline
FutureTimeline.net
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 3,308
It's hideous.
__________________
http://www.FutureTimeline.net - a timeline of future history
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #133  
Old Posted Oct 18, 2006, 11:09 PM
Sky Tower's Avatar
Sky Tower Sky Tower is offline
Guess Who's Back?
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Location: Earth
Posts: 767
When is London going to see any Supertall buildings in its proposals?
In DUBAI, they are building a huge building called the Burj Dubai Tower that is currently only one third built and is already much, much taller than the Canary Wharf, which in comparison is tiny!
With the 2012 Olympics on its way, one would think that we could build an iconic building to celebrate this occasion as do other countries and put London back on the world map as the place to be.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #134  
Old Posted Oct 20, 2006, 5:54 AM
london lad06 london lad06 is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Sep 2006
Posts: 21
Quote:
Originally Posted by Sky Tower
When is London going to see any Supertall buildings in its proposals?
In DUBAI, they are building a huge building called the Burj Dubai Tower that is currently only one third built and is already much, much taller than the Canary Wharf, which in comparison is tiny!
With the 2012 Olympics on its way, one would think that we could build an iconic building to celebrate this occasion as do other countries and put London back on the world map as the place to be.

London has constant building work, theres not much need to build an iconic building for the olympics as its already got iconic architecture & doesn't have to prove its place in the world.

However by 2012 LBT should be built which should be tall enough & iconic enough for ya
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #135  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2006, 8:36 AM
wjfox2004's Avatar
wjfox2004 wjfox2004 is offline
FutureTimeline.net
 
Join Date: Jun 2004
Location: London
Posts: 3,308
Something to make your blood boil...

http://news.bbc.co.uk/nolavconsole/u...wm_6072198.stm
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #136  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2006, 9:09 AM
South South is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2006
Posts: 57
I just saw this on BBC News... bullsh!t to the highest order.

So they want our city to stagnate so that visitors can enjoy the castle against the sky? They're acting as if the towers are being built next-door.

No-one's complaining about the London Eye being opposite the Palace of Westminster:

Reply With Quote
     
     
  #137  
Old Posted Oct 21, 2006, 10:31 AM
jef's Avatar
jef jef is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Aug 2006
Posts: 247
Good find Will.

The BBC is so much anti-capitalist these days that they cannot even acknowledge skyscrapers like 122 Leadenhall, Shard London Bridge, Bishopsgate Tower, etc. are real beauties.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #138  
Old Posted Nov 3, 2006, 2:38 PM
Fabb's Avatar
Fabb Fabb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 9,019
Growing It All Sky High

London plans a spate of dazzling new skyscrapers. But how will they look beside St. Paul's Cathedral?

By William Underhill
Newsweek International

Nov. 6, 2006 issue - Developer Irvine Sellar is thinking big. On the drawing board: a soaring £500 million pyramid right beside the Thames, designed by Italian architect Renzo Piano. "We believe that we are creating a building for London that Londoners can be proud of, and one that reflects Britain's position in the world," says Sellar. Clearly, he considers that position lofty; when completed around 2010, the 310-meter London Bridge Tower—known to locals as "the shard of glass"—will rank as the tallest building in Europe.

But perhaps not for long. "The shard" has plenty of upcoming rivals approved by London city planners—including a clutch of other eye-catching megaliths dubbed "the walkie-talkie," "the cheese grater" and "helter-skelter" by the press. Any post-9/11 security qualms have been forgotten as demand for space soars. By some reckonings, a dozen more skyscrapers could break the city skyline by 2020. And despite unease from the heritage lobby, the rage now is for bold projects that send a powerful message to the world. "This expresses tremendous energy," says Paul Burgess of British Land, the developers responsible for some of the biggest schemes. "This is a visible manifestation of our confidence in the future of London as a global financial hub."

Certainly, it's a break with the past. Up to the 1960s, city planners forbade skyscrapers—still the policy in central Rome and Paris. A glut of cheap, high-rise housing fed public distaste for unsightly towers. Since the early 1990s, a clump of superbuildings has arisen at the Canary Wharf development, a few kilometers downstream from the ancient financial district known as the City. But in the City itself, the tallest building remains the 26-year-old Tower 42, rising to a modest 183 meters.

Now big buildings are increasingly in vogue, thanks largely to London's left-wing mayor, Ken Livingstone. Once leery of developers, Livingstone now counts architect Richard Rogers, a champion of glossy modernism, among his paid advisers. According to city hall, well-sited towers are not just a lure for the business community; they make efficient use of limited space and ease London's growing traffic problems. This year the mayor gained new planning powers to overrule local boroughs that may be nervous about big-scale development. The public, too, appears to have rethought its opposition; one poll found that Norman Foster's Swiss Re building known as "the gherkin"—the first of the City's new-generation towers, completed in 2003—was Britain's most popular landmark.

That doesn't mean developers can count on automatic approval when progress and history collide. "The planning process is more challenging than in any other city where I have ever worked," says Lee Polisano of architects Kohn Pedersen Fox, which has won several high-profile City commissions. Richard Rogers only got permission for his latest dazzler, a 48-story wedge of glass and steel (the "cheese grater"), after he tweaked its design to comply with the regulation requiring that sightlines to St. Paul's Cathedral be preserved. "The history is London's unique selling point in the world market," says Steve Bee of English Heritage, the official watchdog that regularly tussles with the mayor and developers. This month a team of UNESCO inspectors will assess the likely impact of the new supertowers on London's landmarks. "Everyone accepts that the city has to thrive but for future generations you have to preserve these wonderful sights," says UNESCO's Neville Shulman. Who wants to see Westminster Abbey or the 900-year-old Tower of London against a backdrop of outsize office blocks?

The same commercial logic that demands the towers' construction may also limit their numbers. Whatever the city's short-term prospects, developers know that the property market can shift quickly from shortfall to glut. "Developers will only press the button once they are sure these buildings are commercially viable," says Martin Wallace, of property agents CRE Collier. And with plenty of new floor space now approved, sentiment in the field may be turning: last month plans for another 50-story megalith on the City's edge were dropped in favor of a modest low-rise block. Big is beautiful only when it's profitable.

© 2006 Newsweek, Inc
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #139  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2006, 3:40 PM
brisavoine brisavoine is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 91
Quote:
Originally Posted by Fabb
when completed around 2010, the 310-meter London Bridge Tower—known to locals as "the shard of glass"—will rank as the tallest building in Europe.
What a nice example of disinformation. Some people should tell Newsweek about skyscraper projects in Moscow and Paris. In Moscow there are currently two skyscrapers under construction which will be taller than the London Bridge Tower (which hasn't even started construction yet). In Paris the Generali Tower and the so-called "tour signal" may also be taller than the London Bridge Tower, depending on final heights. Apparently Newsweek is very badly informed.
Reply With Quote
     
     
  #140  
Old Posted Nov 4, 2006, 6:31 PM
Fabb's Avatar
Fabb Fabb is offline
Registered User
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Paris
Posts: 9,019
They should have said "western Europe".
The Paris projects are neither approved nor finalized. So, we can't blame Newsweek for that omission.
Reply With Quote
     
     
This discussion thread continues

Use the page links to the lower-right to go to the next page for additional posts
 
 
Reply

Go Back   SkyscraperPage Forum > Global Projects & Construction > City Compilations
Forum Jump


Thread Tools
Display Modes

Forum Jump


All times are GMT. The time now is 2:49 PM.

     
SkyscraperPage.com - Archive - Privacy Statement - Top

Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.8.7
Copyright ©2000 - 2024, vBulletin Solutions, Inc.