Originally posted by mrmitchell
I heard they were going to build a big apartment tower in Little Rock a while back, which would be a big step in moving LR up to a larger class of city. Most of the skyscrapers in this picture if not all of them are offices or hotels. Walmart expanding into housing?

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
As many of you have noticed, whether visitors or residents, that London is relatively short on big buildings, at least until very recently. I have been flicking through some of the proposed buildings that are either under construction and proposed. I think this is a good thing, about time there was more floorspace to bring the prices of space down and they look impressive! The London Bridge Tower is due to be constructed (307m) and I was looking at another proposed building, the Bishopsgate Tower at 308m. Will be cool if these two are built http://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gif

And there are several other buildings being proposed. There is another one called Ecotower which is proposed that would be 485m.

It will be nice to see the skyline of London looking a little bigger http://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gif about friggin' time you guys got into the 20th century.

Now only Washington D.C. is in the dark ages.

and my favourite city aside from Las Vegas. (you guess the city)

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/sl_city_67.jpg

Does London have regs like DC that bar buildings beyond a certain height? DC bans buildings higher than the monument; I can imagine that the equivelent is no buildings higher than Big Ben.

Originally posted by Sn00py
It's about time London started building skyscrapers, what took them so long?

Oh, little things called building regulations, the London Building Acts, conservation areas, listed buildings and good taste.

Having seen what happens when you completely remove impediments to erecting hideous tall buildings in the pursuit of a fast buck (London Docklands Development Zone) and having to live with a view of Canary Wharf, I can honestly say that an excellent strategic view of London from Greenwich has been utterly ruined by a non-descript clutch of Anywheresville buildings.



"It seems to be corporate ego or ambition. It's Master of the Universe syndrome. "You feel important. It is partly commercial, partly psychological and partly corporate," said Paul Finch, editorial director of the Architects' Journal and deputy chairman of the Commission for Architecture and Built Environment (Cabe).

But he struck a note of caution that London's newest landmarks needed to be distinctive in design.

Peter Rees, the City planning officer for the Corporation of London, said: "The skyline is not going to become Manhattan over the next five years." But there will be a cluster of tall buildings around Tower 42 east of the Bank of England, in a location that will not jeopardise views of St Paul's Cathedral, he said. "We are not doing this to change the skyline. "We are doing it because we need more offices surrounded by public transport." Without skyscrapers some companies may take their business elsewhere to cities like New York, Chicago, Hong Kong or Tokyo, it is feared. A combination of prestige, views, accommodation needs and the creation of centres of excellence explain why companies want these buildings, he said. As for the public, he said: "It is amazing how they are warming to the idea of tall buildings."

Mayor Ken Livingstone shares a positive view of tall buildings in the right places. He has said he expects to see a limited number of very tall buildings developed - about one a year - with these most likely to be in the City, Canary Wharf and some other town centre locations. Much of the development in the City seems driven by the insurance sector.

Nicholas Antram, the London region's assistant regional director, said: "It would have been a brave decision to reject it on heritage grounds in a location in need of regeneration and in an area where there are three existing tall buildings." English Heritage insists tall buildings have to be well-planned and of high architectural quality. "We must make sure they go in the right places and don't have an impact on our cherished heritage. "We only have to look around London to see the mistakes of the 1960s," said Mr Antram.
by Margaret Ryan
BBC News Online



Or the 1980s and 1990s.

Small is beautiful:

http://www.findaproperty.com/agent.a...rop&pid=240208

LA

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/sl_city_11.jpg

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/sl_city_16.jpg

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/sl_city_13.jpg

http://www.pixelmap.com/images/sl_city_20.jpg

DC would look downright ugly with skyscrapers inside the city.

Skyscrapers are ugly!!!

Parishttp://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gifhttp://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gifhttp://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gif

Originally posted by laurentius
@ Dis yeah yeah so your hometown is full of plastic replicas, who the **** cares http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/sleep.gif the buildings are not made of plastic (except maybe New York New York http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/smile.gif)

You guys are just jealous because I live in such a cool city.

I've been to other cities in the U.S. and they are just boring compared to where I live. That's the reason I left the navy. Norfolk sucked. Orlando was the best of where I lived, but even that couldn't compare to Vegas. Charelston, SC wasn't too bad, but still can't compare. Pascagoula MIss- yeah living in a small town away from traffic was cool- but the rednecks were nasty down there.

And other large glamorous cities I have been too didn't seem so great. Chicaog, Dallas. What's to do there? The only city that can compare is New York city. They have more entertainment than we have. But I'm not sure if I care for broadway shows.

Originally posted by Patroklos
Didn't Paris just put its bigger buildings in a single district away from most of the historical stuff? Yes, but the reason for that is because underground Paris can't support the weight of a skyscraper. It's the catacombs, you see. They've made the bedrock a Swiss cheese, and thus unsuitable for heavy buildings.

The Minneapolis Skyline http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...lies/heart.gif





http://www.nvo.com/beaulier/nss-fold...ine_summer.jpg</p>

Didn't Paris just put its bigger buildings in a single district away from most of the historical stuff?

I thought they had taller buildings there, but I have seen other pictures and it looks nice.

You know molly, you're a snob of the worst kind http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ons/icon13.gif

Yet still, it is all completely subjective, whether you like it or not...

Originally posted by TheStinger
As everyone who has ever watched US movies knows the only thing to be seen in london is Big Ben and red buses And those guys with the big hats. http://www.discussworldissues.com/im...ons/icon14.gif

It doesn't help that nowadays most highrises have the upper 20 "floors" doing nothing but looking pretty. In the picture shown, I doubt the top third of the building has any useful space.

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
Of course I don't work in a planning department, I have a proper job...

And people say worse things about me every day.

You should grow a sense of humour http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ies/tongue.gif
You first.

I simply don't like being misrepresented. I couldn't give a flying f*ck about your insults.


Perhaps now you could profitably spend your time educating yourself about architecture and buildings and the built environment before speaking Analinguish. http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...ilies/wink.gif

Let me see...

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/city_night2-01.jpg

Here is what they are proposing in a few years time...

A prediction of what it may look like in a few years

http://www.skyscrapernews.com/images...n2007_pic1.jpg

yes, I find most manmade objects ugly. I just happend to like the beer colored hotel.

Technically Mandaly Bay is beer colored (actually it's gold), but that's cheap beer. Wynn Las Vegas reminds me of Newcastle Brown Ale.

Actually I do like MGM grand, but not really the building itself, but the lighting on the building. It's pretty cool looking, and I still wonder how they accomplish it.

Originally posted by Provost Harrison
http://www.discussworldissues.com/fo...s/rolleyes.gif

There is no denying that the 60s were a disaster but we're not talking about that kind of half-arsed cheap construction...
Remind me again- how did the architecturally uninspired Canary Wharf buildings come to be built ?


Oh, that's right- over the top of any objections from any locals, property developers were given free rein to stick up any old crap because planning rules and regulations had been virtually suspended for them by a very helpful right wing government in search of easy money and a Guangzhou type economic development zone.


Oh wait, that has a familiar ring to it...

http://bookshop.universitiesuk.ac.uk...egionallon.pdf

Market driven planning I believe it was euphemistically referred to...