westender
Gothamite
westender
Gothamite
Joined: 12:58 AM - Sep 16, 2010

8:38 PM - Feb 07, 2011 #11

What do you make of the Cheese Grater?
The Shard?
Personally, the Pinnacle is too...strange and not really a successfully pleasing to the eyes organic design, say, like the Gherkin is.
When will they start building it?
-bacchusny



The Pinnacle? About 50 % of the basement slabs were complete by December 2010. Construction commenced sometime late last year and we should start a thread about it so some of our London friends here can start keeping us posted about its construction.The bottom floors of this building do actually look interesting.





The other buildings such as the Shard, Gherkin, Cheese Grater / Glass Duplo Block - well they each have their own thread and I will post my thoughts there.

RENDER OF THE BASE OF THE PINNACLE/BISHOPSGATE TOWER LONDON
Quote
Like
Share

westender
Gothamite
westender
Gothamite
Joined: 12:58 AM - Sep 16, 2010

8:44 PM - Feb 07, 2011 #12

The Walkie Talkie will make the London skyline the butt of architecture jokes - around the world - for the next 50 years.
Sorry, I meant to say 500 years.
If they do build it, they will make the London skyline look like something from The Simpsons.


-greatlester
The Walkie Talkie is starting to grow on me (at least the renders)What is not growing on me is the fact that London skyscrapers are like New York circa 1910 - just not that many and not that wonderful for the era - You cannot nay that the Gherkin in 2011 has the same impact as the Chrysler Building did in 1931 or 1935, and with the Tower Verre and the Whole Foods Skyscraper and the Carnegie 57 AND the Freedom Tower all in the pipeline/under construction in New York, London doesn't really have that much more interesting than our present developement - and thats ALL IT HAS!!!
Quote
Like
Share

iamjasper
Bridge and Tunnel
iamjasper
Bridge and Tunnel
Joined: 12:05 PM - Feb 16, 2011

12:38 PM - Feb 16, 2011 #13

The Walkie Talkie will make the London skyline the butt of architecture jokes - around the world - for the next 50 years.
Sorry, I meant to say 500 years.
If they do build it, they will make the London skyline look like something from The Simpsons.


-greatlester
Disagree. The WT will be the more interesting building there. The Shard however? It's tall - sure. But somewhat boring in its approach. There isn't much to it except a tall building with angled sides. And its in a part of London where there's not much there except a good view of the Tower Bridge. Nice one!!
Quote
Like
Share

thenarrator
Manhattanist
thenarrator
Manhattanist
Joined: 4:08 PM - Nov 25, 2009

8:08 AM - Mar 08, 2011 #14

At least London can boast about having the world's highest fox. See the thread here in the London Skyscraper sub-Forum about the Shard.
Quote
Like
Share

thenarrator
Manhattanist
thenarrator
Manhattanist
Joined: 4:08 PM - Nov 25, 2009

6:05 PM - May 04, 2011 #15

The Pinnacle base actually does look interesting - but too much glass.
Quote
Like
Share

archnyer
Knickerbocker
archnyer
Knickerbocker
Joined: 5:26 PM - Jan 22, 2010

11:17 AM - May 15, 2011 #16

From the March 2011 Atlantic Magazine, "HOW SKYSCRAPERS CAN SAVE THE CITY". by Edward Glaeser.

Second, historic preservation should be limited and well defined. Landmarking a masterpiece like the Flatiron Building or the old Penn Station is sensible. Preserving a post-war glazed-brick building is absurd. But where do you draw the line between those two extremes? My own preference is that, in a city like New York, the Landmarks Preservation Commission should have a fixed number of buildings, perhaps 5,000, that it may protect. The commission can change its chosen architectural gems, but it needs to do so slowly. It shouldn’t be able to change its rules overnight to stop construction in some previously unprotected area. If the commission wants to preserve a whole district, then let it spread its 5,000-building mandate across the area. Perhaps 5,000 buildings are too few; but without some sort of limit, any regulatory agency will constantly try to increase its scope
Will London's new skyscrapers save London city?
Quote
Like
Share

snowbro
Bridge and Tunnel
snowbro
Bridge and Tunnel
Joined: 12:32 PM - Jan 10, 2011

12:19 PM - Jun 02, 2011 #17

Brave, it is nice to see London building some very unique looking skyscrapers, but here are my opinions about which are better.

If you look at New York and the projects that are underway now, such as Carnegie 57, Tower Verre, 250 57th Street Whole Foods Skyscraper, and Freedom Tower, and the WTC 2, WTC 4, and the other World Trade Center buildings you will note that even just the projects underway now in Manhattan are bigger, more substantial and even more unique (look at Verre and 250 East 57th Street) than all of the skyscrapers ever built in London.

Size? Freedom Tower
Quantity? Look at the list to the right, and that's only a fraction of the skyscrapers in this city.
Quality? NYC is the Greece and Rome of Skyscrapers (Chicago is the Egypt of Skyscrapers)
Unique Design? Tower Verre, Carnegie 57, WTC 2, and 250 East 57th (probably the best)
Density? Manhattan is far more densely packed than London, even 10 blocks of Manhattan has more impressive skyscrapers than all of London

NYC WINS BIATCHES , THERE AINT NO CONTEST , YOU LOSE SO GO AND EAT YOUR FISH AND CHIPS AND PAY FOR YOUR OLYMPICS FOR THE NEXT 20 YEARS

Hong Kong has some real impressive buildings too. I think that even Tokyo has skyscrapers as impressive as London, maybe it's a tie, but remember that Tokyo is built on a filled in bay in an earthquake zone in the shadow of a Volcano (Fuji) - so London should be miles ahead which it isn't.
Quote
Like
Share

tokyojoe
Knickerbocker
tokyojoe
Knickerbocker
Joined: 11:24 PM - Jan 26, 2011

7:56 PM - Apr 04, 2012 #18

Tokyo has the world's best skyscrapers friend, Tokyo Midtown, Mori Tower, Tokyo Tower, Sky Tree, Gakuen, and the wonderful Yoyogi Docomo Tower friends, they are all very nice.

Take care friends.
Quote
Like
Share