London has another supertall on the way.
The building on the left, with the cross-gartering bracing. It's called 1 Undershaft and will be 309.6m high, the same height as the Shard.
The architect is Eric Parry. He originally wanted to have a nice hat for the building, but the developers, Aroland Holdings, said no.
It's Chicago/NY in style. Parry says that London's skyline is transforming from white stone to green glass. Hurray....
It'll have a free viewing gallery at the top. (The Shard charges £25)
The Guardian calls it "refreshingly blunt".
The big building to the right, incidentally, is also currently being built, 22 Bishopsgate.
http://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/architecture-design-blog/2015/dec/07/1-undershaft-tallest-skyscraper-city-of-london-eric-parry#comment-64680244
The reaction?
I think most people won't like it that much.
Some people think that London had an interesting skyline a year or so ago, dominated by interesting shapes; but that this has changed with the arrival of the two blocky scrapers in the past few months.
>>51787400
>>51787400
The Walkie Talkie looks like shit, and all these new big monstrosities are killing the skyline. Thankfully none of them are yet blocking St Pauls' from the west.
>>51787400
Looks pretty nice imo. Not every skyscraper should be a special snowflake, the skyline just starts looking too chaotic.
Why does London have such small buildings?
BAHAHAHAHAHAHAHA
DO BRITS EVEN KNOW HOW TO SKYLINE PROPERLY
>>51787719
>m-muh tall rectangular boxes
>>51787400
凶
凶
凶
凶
凶
凶
I thought London had shitty ground for foundations. Also it's unaffordable or something.
>>51787651
Historical reasons, up until like 15 years ago there were virtually no skyscrapers since a law passed by, I think Queen Elizabeth I, said that no building above a certain height, could be built. London has expanded outwards, not upwards, until it has covered much of the south-east of England. The few skyscrapers that have been popping up in the City of London are special cases, though I think rules have recently been relaxed.
At least it doesn't look like a butt plug.
London's Skyline is complete shit though, you should make your buildings big nice targets for planes to crash into like us.
Looks alright
![4323815-london-skyline[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/ykGv0eO.jpg "4323815-london-skyline[1].jpg")
I want to puke
>>51787799
>m-muh special snowflake buildings
I like it. Finishes off the City cluster quite nicely. Here's a good FT article on the building
http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/5eaa0532-9c0a-11e5-8ce1-f6219b685d74.html#axzz3tabkfuQB
>The bracing is necessary because of the architect’s wish to create a visual and physical connection between two of the City’s oldest places of worship, St Helen’s Bishopsgate and St Andrew Undershaft — both founded in the 12th century.
>To do this, the tower has been raised above the ground, leaving a 10.5m public space beneath it. In the process, the tower’s core has had to be pushed to one side, which necessitates the bracing on its external walls.
>Mr Parry’s plans will also create a large public square in front of the tower with a sunken area of shops and restaurants in the form of a recessed ellipse.
I am also glad the age of the "wibbly wobblies" seems to be over
>>51787719
skyline this properly you fucking fag.
>>51787400
>skyscrapers in the city centre
>not architectual cancer
>>51788249
the new skyline looks better anyway senpai
london could use a couple of jet liners into their "buildings" desu
>>51788249
CRAWWWWWWWLIIIINNNNNNNG MY SKIN
>mfw this song is actually true to life and not metaphorical for auslards
>>51787400
It's boring and cheap. Skyscrapes of the old-syle are alright though.
>>51788183
>wibbly wobblies
>mfw recalling the Wobbly Bridge
Scary as fuck desu.
>>51788490
Some boring is necessary when the rest of the buildings in that cluster are so crazy
I am also glad the planners agree with me that we needed a skyscraper the same height as the Shard on the other side of the river. You need that symmetry
>>51788183
>Although the tower appears to be a simple extruded block, its design in fact employs a subtle entasis — a trick the Greeks used on their columns.
>The tower tapers almost imperceptibly as it rises. The bracing also slims down to reflect the decreasing need for reinforcement on the higher storeys.
>The bracing itself — crosses of a slightly folded section of weathered steel — gives the tower its architectural expression, echoing the structure of both the neighbouring Gherkin and Cheesegrater, although apparently employing two-and-a-half times less structural steel than the latter.
>>51788058
Even Bangkok has a better Skyline lol
>>51788058
>>51789360
There is no need to be so rude
>>51789738
london really does need a better skyline given its global influence. i suppose many of the older cities across europe have tried to maintain some of their historic charm, but you wound up getting caught in the middle.
>>51789920
There is loads of historic charm in London, we just don't treat our capital city like a museum. If you walk around the City, at the feet of those skyscrapers you'll see plenty of old historic buildings, even crumbling roman walls. It's even better because people work there and shit happens. There is the entire sweep of history in front of you. The skyline is unorthodox because it must grow around the activity and the older buildings, it's organic rather than planned.
You won't find such a city anywhere else, not one of London's stature. Paris has that artificial division - and even the "old" part of Paris is actually newer than many parts of London - Haussman did it in the late 19th century. They destroyed much of old Paris in the process. Tokyo was completely rebuilt after the firebombing, and New York was planned and new.
it's not horrible
Why is london trying so hard to be NY ?
London's charm lies entirely in its old buildings, new skyscrapers are always eyesores, anywhere in the world.
>>51787400
Why not,it fits with London anyway. I like that London had that messy and draft urban planning, even if it doesn't really look good. It's interesting, fits the city pretty well, and the goat urban planning is already taken by Paris anyway.
>>51790453
We are not, London is nothing like NYC. This new skyscraper is more in the Chicago style than the NY style any way.
We are building sky scrapers because we need the office space, its that simple. London cannot expand outward because it's trapped by the Green belt
>Undershafted
Yeah I agree you're getting undershafted there.
On a serious note, it'll probably be one of the less offensive things in your skyline. The butt plug is far worse.
>>51787400
Way to ruin a beautiful city.
>>51790784
Yeah, but chicago is one of the most well planned cities in the world, while London has just kinda expanded since centuries.
This is what confuses me, why do people and the government just focus on london ? Why not build and invest in other cities too ? London is being given undue importance by people, it dont think its a good sign to have all your power and money invested in a single city.
>>51790983
Tell that to the investors. Who wants to build a skyscraper in fucking Manchester?
>>51791082
>Who wants to build a skyscraper in fucking Manchester?
Bit rude
>>51791082
I'm betting most of the major investors in london are ME oil money sheikhs. Its also the government's responsibility to develop other regions.
>>51789920
I don't think you understand. They're not allowed to build skyscrapers in most of the city because there are protected historic views.
>>51791082
Manchester has a pretty based skyscraper, and a few smaller towers.
>>51791520
Absolutelydisgusting.tiff
I implore anyone to find a decent looking skyscraper built after 1990.
Protip - there are none.
>>51790983
You need to understand the situation, you're treating the UK like it's a closed system. It isn't.
1. London is in a global *international* competition with the world's other global cities, in particular NYC. London needs investment in order to compete at this level, it is also experiencing strong growth and has unique advantages which other cities don't have.
2. The other cities are in a national competition against each other, although the Northern Powerhouse idea sees several of the largest connected by transport links to become a hub area and challenge London. You are correct in that the other cities particularly the great Northern cities have been neglected, but you a wrong to paint it as a choice. It's not "London or the rest" - we need investment in BOTH.
Fortunately this government has started to channel some investment to the Midlands and the North, and in particular get foreign investment
>>51791604
Ebin maymay
>>51791837
What advantages does london have over other cities ? As far as I know, there are no geographical advantages apart from the proximity to the thames.
>>51791975
>OH LOOK ANOTHER BLUE TINTED GLASS SKYSCRAPER SOMEONE MANAGED TO PULL OUT OF THEIR ASS
>>51791604
I like it desu.
>>51788361
I don't mind clusters.
But it's bad when scrapers are all you see. And there size means you don't need many scrapers spread throughout the city so that all the nice historic buildings get overshadowed.
>>51789040
The Shard stands out too much. The buildings to the South of it are pretty miserable looking, as it Guys Hospital next to it. It doesn't look right.
>>51792184
London is THE flight hub to Europe, especially for Americans
>>51790291
Shut up Jew.
At least it's not that piece of shit Ribbon Hotel planned for Edinburgh
>>51791520
no.jpeg
That things stands out like an eyesaw.
Manchester is building lots of trash lately. It is really sad to see.
>>51792358
I think Frankfurt is bigger flight hub, IDK.
what a ugly building(;o;)
this building will make me feel like i'm in city in Asia like Tokyo or Hong Kong.
I love London with old town scenery...
>>51792184
You are thinking about this the wrong way, there is little physical reason other than precedent for London's dominance.
It has little geographical advantage or anything like that, it has just built its services industry massively.
>>51792184
>What advantages does london have over other cities ? As far as I know, there are no geographical advantages apart from the proximity to the thames.
There are several industries with deep roots in London, most obviously finance and legal professions but also creative industries, advertising and more. You can't just uproot everything and move it somewhere else. London has around 5 international airports including Heathrow which have excellent links to Europe, the Middle East and East Asia.
The size of London is a strength in itself, as you get a greater confluence of ideas. Indeed London attracts top talent from all over the world, in a way that no other British city does, and if you want that talent to stay and contribute then London needs investment.
The obvious proof of what I'm saying is when the ONS moved to Wales, 95% of staff wanted to stay in London so they left the ONS and found employment elsewhere. The quality of the UK's statistics suffered as a result because all those experienced staff were lost
>>51792502
>I think Frankfurt is bigger flight hub, IDK.
Hahah, nope. London is 2nd best connected hub city in the world after Dubai.
>>51792545
Also, this is a sort of snowballing effect. Investment into London raises its global city competition, and then expectations rise - its a snowbally mechanism.
>>51787437
It looks better than Tampon Tower, anyway
>2016
>still making skyscrapers
lmao lad
>>51792502
http://www.independent.co.uk/travel/uk/london-leads-as-the-worlds-top-airline-hub-by-a-wide-margin-9999459.html
>>51787400
Wait, I thought the entire purpose of the special snowflake buildings was to avoid blocking "protected views" in the city, like from [point a] to [church], or whatever else?
Doesn't a gigantic, blocky building right in the middle kind of mean all the previous special planning was for nothing?
I mean, I don't have anything against plain skyscrapers, but still.
>>51787814
縁起悪い建物だなw
![manchester_hilton_aw170410_2[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/1rsmJii.jpg "manchester_hilton_aw170410_2[1].jpg")
>>51792528
This is a good point, if Britain needs skyscrapers 'n' shit why build it in London?
Why not pick another city to build a skyscraper metropolis in, preferably up north to stop them crying about how poor they are compared to the south.
Maybe Manchester, it was never pretty to begin with and skyscrapers wouldn't look out of place with this thing on the skyline already.
I wish we still built in the old styles.
I don't mind seeing (nice) scrapers, but slowly we are losing the older buildings, and few people are building in those styles any more, despite how loved they are. There is no balance.
>>51791604
>>51792586
I think it wouldn't be a problem if the money was used to improve our relatively slow train system and to convert cities in to miniature Londons.
Tax and land prices are extremely high in London, so maybe as an incentive for businesses to move to these new baby Londons offer reduced pricing on something, anything.
>Not that it will work, mostly because corporations probably pay relatively fuck all anyway through tax avoidance schemes.
>>51792862
Pic related,
This was built in London in the last few decades. Looks better than most scrapers.
>>51792902
MILANO
I
L
A
N
O
>>51792921
Don't get me started on HS2 and not going full MagLev across the country
>>51792862
Reminds me of New Orleans. You've got a couple ugly sky squares dominating what would otherwise be a very pleasant, historical area of the city. Although I'm not sure whether or not the City of London is quite as well preserved or as pretty as the French Quarter.
posting the only good skyscrapers in history
>>51792966
It's a shame really because we invented the bloody things, yet we lack a high speed train service for most of the country. Germany has god-tier train services and as a result their business and wealth isn't consolidated in one city.
>>51792786
Manchester is getting lots of towers going up AFAIK.
It'll look like Brum does now in 10 years, I think, in terms of number of towers. Pic related.
![_78559279_hs2_624_v12[1].gif](https://i.imgur.com/i6BMlJ2.gif "_78559279_hs2_624_v12[1].gif")
>>51792639
>Doesn't a gigantic, blocky building right in the middle kind of mean all the previous special planning was for nothing?
No, the views to St. Paul's are not obscured by the new building
>>51792786
>This is a good point, if Britain needs skyscrapers 'n' shit why build it in London?
Britain doesn't, LONDON does. Because there's not space in London. Other cities have more space.
>>51792862
We're not losing the nice older buildings, they are removing a previous small skyscraper for this one, which was damaged in an IRA bombing. In fact the lower part of the new skyscraper is being done to highlight the old 12th century churches
>>51792921
>I think it wouldn't be a problem if the money was used to improve our relatively slow train system and to convert cities in to miniature Londons.
That's what they're doing with "HS3", but it's not about creating "miniature Londons", they're trying to create a sort of northern supercity. Read this article for a good explanation
http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/business-26472423
>>51793036
Well London has its spots, there's no completely nice or shit boroughs.
>>51793036
The ground around those scrapers is largely historic, still.
I worked there for 1 week and looked around and was impressed.
From the sky, the scrapers dominate, from street level, they are ..... almost hard to find.
>>51787400
There's no fucking point trying to bring NYC/Chicago style skyscrapers to London because London is asymmetric and chaotic as fuck. Round skyscrapers work much better due to the lack of a regular pattern street grid.
Hong Kong works well because almost all buildings are facing the river.
>>51787400
>supertall
>under 1k feet
LEL
And its called undershaft to boot
L O N D O N
O
N
D
O
N
>>51793122
>>We're not losing the nice older buildings
You do lose them. Not in this case, but in others.
>>51792254
That's some Combine shit right there
>>51793234
Supertall = >300m.
>>51793091
That looks fucking terrible. I bet it looks even worse at street level.
>>51793255
>non-Pakistani gets off the train at Manchester Piccadilly
>https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=2Hjqh4cIxZY starts up
How long until Manchester surpasses London?
>>51793122
>northern supercity
I see, that makes a lot of sense actually. Although I feel sorry for Hebden Bridge because it looks quite quaint in the pictures.
>>51793091
Literally Texas tier. Like not even Dallas though. It looks like Houston's suburbs
>>51793305
I actually like it. Mostly because it has decent density for an English city. It has reached "critical mass", at least at that angle. The standard of architecture is low though, yes.
>>51793383
>SUPERGIGA HDR OVERMAXFLOW ZOOOOM
>>51793383
It's fairly cheap actually with a decent university and trains to London are only about 2.5 hours so I say it could become a capital for Britain's start-ups.
>>51793413
Lets look at Brum, Alabama
Oh, a bunch of boring square boxes. How surprising.
it looks better than the other ones you have
>>51793255
>Combine
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZRCcGUvmZDE
>>51793402
Hebden Bridge will stay residential most likely, it will act as a feeder of commuters into the various northern sub cities
When I say "supercity" don't imagine the entire thing urbanised, it means the current cities well-connected enough to benefit from idea/information exchange like a city would, but remaining fairly distinct
>>51793250
I would be surprised. The nice older buildings, even the ugly ones, are very well protected by various conservation groups. When new buildings go up in London more often than not it's replacing shit. Usually areas that were bombed in the war.
>>51787400
It looks great desu. Makes the dildo a lot less noticeable too, how can you not like it senpai?
>>51793497
They should just rebuild it at this stage. Jesus christ.
>>51793497
I lived in Manc for three years and I never noticed this. How terrifying.
>>51793443
It's necessary when your city looks shit.
>>51793497
Kek
>>51793486
Birmingham is barely even a metropolitan area. Isn't Manchester like one your top 5 biggest cities?
Also, pic related is Houston's sprawl, which looks even more developed than Manchester's downtown.
>>51793597
It's pretty good if you like modern urban areas. Just a matter of taste really.
What is your favourite London cluster?
>>51793675
>picname
What a terminal wally.
>>51793675
You mong. That's not Houston.
It's a Tokyo for ANTS
>>51793675
lolno, that's tokyo.
this is what houston looks like. texas has no cities, just suburban sprawl.
>>51793675
Houston is 5x the size of Manchester
>>51793713
Looks like an American cluster if you polished it and made it 10x less shit
>>51793763
HOUSTON WE HAVE A SHTHOLE
>>51791520
That looks absolutely dreadful
>>51793757
So we don't need the immigrants
>>51787400
>1 Undershaft
>>51792862
putting old style revival among historical buildings is rubbish
>>51791975
o shit
Why do people with shit opinions bother to post ITT?
![the-worlds-population-concentrated[1].png](https://i.imgur.com/r9Dtzlf.png "the-worlds-population-concentrated[1].png")
>>51793920
people don't understand just how insanely sprawley the american Sunbelt is.
>>51787400
why are they sop close together . It's creepy.
UK tries to do everything that American does,but on a smaller shittier scale.
>>51794126
>6.9 billion people
Is this from like 2004?
>>51787400
>London sense of architectural harmony
JUST
>>51794216
Yeah well we didn't pull out a white flag before the bombing started.
>>51794192
2011.
http://persquaremile.com/2011/01/18/if-the-worlds-population-lived-in-one-city/
I can't imagine that the 2015 population is large enough to change the point of the image.
![green-belt-uk-1[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/Vu2KYqc.jpg "green-belt-uk-1[1].jpg")
>>51794148
>UK tries to do everything that American does,but on a smaller shittier scale.
What the fuck. Americans don't have a monopoly on space-saving buildings.
London has NO SPACE. It can't expand outwards. It's growing. The only way is UP. Stop being so rude and dumb.
Oh yeah you're right we should build everything on a larger scale than the fucking USA because we really have a continent's worth of space on this island don't we? Fuck off. Cunt.
>>51794269
This. Paris was completely intact after the war, London had to rebuilt in hideous brutalist style.
>>51794303
>tfw Hatfield is shit but City of London is only 15-20 mins away
Too bad it's fucking expensive though and I live on the opposite end of town to the station.
>undershaft
Also its shitty like everything around it
DUDE SKYSCRAPERS LMAO
idk why europoors want skyscrapers now. skyscrapers used to be for the cool kids (usa). europe isn't supposed to be cool, it's supposed to be classy. that means medium height buildings.
also, skyscrapers aren't even cool anymore. now that every subuhman nigger, chink, or arab is building MUH DIK towers, skyscrapers now seem lame. giant glass office buildings aren't cool when every civilization has them.
>>51794303
God how horrifying
Can we just send 5 billion people off to space please, we'rebreeding like rabbits
>>51792960
Good taste m8
London's city planning has to be one of the worst in the world. But I guess that is what you get when you let so many foreigners buy property in London.
>>51794216
London is probably the ugliest city on Earth, and I've been to Fallujah.
>>51794423
???
The green = trees
It shows the greenbelt
>>51792786
>>51791520
This picture triggers me in some disturbing way, like I need a fucking knife to kill some kids in kindergarden and take my dick out to piss all over their dead bodies while laughing histericaly. It is sooo ugly, whole new level of uglines in that one fucking building and diference (contrast) between the area and that shit. Its not even ugly, its rude, its just wrong and evil, its creepy and disturbing. How do these fails even happend, there are fucking millions invested, its UK not a fucking Serbia where "magic" like this is normal and no one gives a fuck because everything in here is full of shit.
Pic related, most expensive "house", its actualy a house?!?! in the world, India.
I have same feelings for this beauty.
I know I overeacted a litlle but that triggered me
>>51794423
>we'rebreeding like rabbits
no, pakis and niggers are breeding like rabbits. the population increase in europe stems entirely from mass migration from 3rd world countries. if you closed your borders to shitskins, you wouldn't be having such growing pains.
>>51794437
>city planning
I don't think they had much time for city planners in the 12th century. The main confusing thing is that after most of the city burnt down in the Great Fire of 1666, they just decided to build on the original street plan instead of starting from scratch.
>>51794422
Want a cyberpunk city that I can pretend to be a hacker in tbqh.
>>51794481
>the population increase in europe stems entirely from mass migration from 3rd world countries
Latest UK immigration
>>51794303
No,build one big tower,like in Half Life.
>>51794527
That doesn't add up to the 500,000 or so immigrants that actually do arrive each year.
>>51794216
>>51794447
Hate to agree with you, but you're right
Our gloomy overcast weather doesn't help either
>>51794524
manhattan can be cyberpunky but it'll never be as cyberpunk as tokyo because tokyo has so many tight narrow streets and alleys.
>>51794545
Welcome. Welcome to City 17. You have chosen, or been chosen, to relocate to one of our finest remaining urban centres. I thought so much of City 17 that I elected to establish my administration here, in the Citadel so thoughtfully provided by our benefactors. I've been proud to call City 17 my home. And so, whether you are here to stay, or passing through on your way to parts unknown - welcome to City 17. It's safer here.
>>51793763
Looks pretty comfy
>>51794586
That total 500,000 figure includes Brits returning home. ONS source can be found here
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/general-election-2015/politics-blog/11622718/Immigration-nation-where-are-the-Britains-migrants-coming-from-and-why.html
>>51794476
Buckingham Palace is more expensvie than that.
>>51794636
I don't even really remember it being built, just remember it being there one day.
>>51794636
I walked that street every day while I was at London.That's a good street.
>>51794720
The article says that there's only about 76,000 Brits returning home each year. So that makes it something like 424,000 immigrants.
>>51794303
London isn't that dense, fortunately, so there is room within for expansion.
You could double its population density and that'd make it more NYC-ish in density.
When the entire downtown/zone 1 is as dense as The City, then we'll be in trouble, but that'll never happen. I'd rather it did happen, though. I like The City.
>>51794926
>I like The City.
Getting off at Moorgate is like going to a metropolis like Shanghai.
>>51793282
I know that
But it ended up in the north of 300m but less than 1k feet baby/joke supertall club
>>51794066
What the fuck is that?
>>51794902
I mentioned it to demonstrate not to take the overall figures at face value. You say "only 76,000 Brits returning home", that's a larger number than any of the immigrant groups we actually receive. It's a lot of Brits.
>>51794625
Tokyo is also trying to cram way the fuck more people into a tiny space. A 700sqft apartment in NYC is like a mansion in Tokyo.
>>51794476
Thats a disgusting piece of shit.
>>51794422
New NY skyscrapers are absolutely dogshit. Did american creativity and taste just go down the shitter ? 20th century NY sky scrapers are amazingly beautiful and actually provide an identity to the city. Even the freedom tower is JUST tier.
Also, nice post, the arabs are indeed trying to erect sky dicks.
>>51791975
pay artist rights to Brancusi please
>>51795212
>look at 'Thats a disgusting piece of shit.'
>see this flag
POO IN THE LOO
>>51794689
>>51795212
>Did american creativity and taste just go down the shitter ?
the whole world did.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Style_(architecture)
modern architecture is meant to be acultural. it's meant to be able to fit into any city you want. this is why every skyscraper, regardless of whether it's built in new york city, shanghai, london, or dubai, basically looks the same. the globalization of architecture affects everyone.
>>51795208
Tokyo kind of has the same problem as London, they just kept building over the same roads which were originally designed for just pedestrians and maybe a few carriages.
Manhattan was designed for the future.
>>51795334
>muslim serb doesnt understand irony
>>51794476
Do you have any pics of the private DESIGNATED street?
London's sprawl isn't that bad desu. Not sure why you haven't done more building up though, being an island nation and all.
>>51795396
>not knowing shit about architecture
lel
>>51795261
>>51795461
>euro sprawl
>>51793060
This
I really used to look up to you guys and then you went and false flagged your own heritage and ruined America forever.
>inside job
>>51795461
>London's sprawl isn't that bad desu.
London is the greenest big city, in that it has more green space than the others
>>51795550
>>51794216
Hey, I recognise that Battlefield map.
>>51795072
its an office tower negro, cant you see
>>51789040
saiba panku!
>>51791604
>indian skyscrapers
>>51793486
>unauthorized copying and distribution is prohibited
Reported.
>>51793713
Isle of Dogs is one of the best looking places in London.
Driving through there on cold December mornings with in the fog is maximum comfy
>>51790279
well put.
They need to get rid of London City airport and remove the height limit 2bh
London skyscrapers are babby-tier relative to other major cities (not that you can easily tell when you're there).
Also
>Building it 40cm shorter than the shard
C U C K
>>51797059
I saw that in some documentary years back, its some mansion of some Indian billionaire.
Everyone still shits on their designated shitting streets though.
>>51794988
Never got off at Moorgate
I only worked in London for a week. The Tube was my favourite part. Loved just relaxing on a packed Tube, knowing the other people on it have just spent the day working too.
Some of the Tube stations are neat, as well.
Going to be quite strange to see London in a decade's time, the amount of building work, including dozens of skyscrapers, that goes on there is mad.
>>51793713
City for sure, Canary Wharf is just dull. Lots of new towers going up there though.
>>51797645
We barely need buildings taller than 100m, let alone 300,
>>51797271
I have authorization.
>>51797396
>london
>cold
Is this a joke?
>>51797955
Are you saying it doesn't get cold in London?
>>51790279
Shame it looks like fucking shit then.
Organic shit is still shit.
>>51798021
Are you saying that it gets cold anywhere in England?
>>51797926
>We don't need more floorspace in central London
lmao
>>51789920
Why the fuck does it need a skyline you dumb american fucktard
It literally has no importance
>>51798738
It does need a skyline, little butthurt fag.
>>51798154
wow you must be a fucking eskimo little monkey man or something, look how impressive you are not feeling the cold like most people, you're so cool and hip xD
>>51793305
It looks alright from ground level
white brumfag here
>>51787400
Shit it looks good i'm jealous
>>51790983
New York is better planned than Chicago.
>>51787400
Ugly as fuck. At least try to keep the old look of your city
>>51787400
i like it
>>51801832
It's a living city not a museum you nonce
>>51802149
i'd rather live in a "museum" desu. post-ww2 architecture is lolbad
>>51802381
I'd rather go there on holiday and live in London
>>51802490
>living in London
Kek, you couldn't find a more depressing city?
>>51802954
Fuck off Pekka
>>51788387
People don't understand that this is how Chicago ended up with new, nice ass buildings instead of some shitty pseudo European style of architect. The great fire of Chicago burnt down almost 1/3 of the city, and in it's ashes we rebuilt.
Chicago, in fear of another fire, used stone and steel to build instead of wood, a trend that new York and Los Angeles would soon copy, albeit much later.
Because of this unique building arrangement, Chicago shines brighter than new York or Tokyo from space
>>51801832
I don't mind modern architecture, as long as its good. London's skyscrapers are good enough, even though I prefer the older architecture.
I suppose the best thing is to have some old and some new cities. I wish we had more old cities, though. All of our medium-sized cities have become modern - and they became modern in the 20th century sense, so quite ugly.
But you can't keep things old forever. It's also a matter of how new and different the current architecture should be. The revolution of the 20th century art/architecture world was probably not favoured by the majority, but it'd be unfair to ask architects to only copy.
>>51787400
Here, have our devastated skyline to make you feel better. =3c
>>51807565
i like that tower towards the right
t. cleveland
>>51807565
Actually looks better than London
I like this one
The problem with London's skyline is that each one tries to be THE skyscraper, the iconic one that's in every photo, and every visitor comes to see. The result is a horrendous mismatch of garbage, because they still all look like shit individually.
>>51809016
No visitor comes to London to see the City. That is the most bullshit thing I've ever read.
t. Londoner who regularly walks around the City on weekends precisely because THERE'S NO ONE THERE
![_87077336_dbox_epa_1us_towercrown[1].jpg](https://i.imgur.com/RoCfVIq.jpg "_87077336_dbox_epa_1us_towercrown[1].jpg")
