Exactly. Thank you. It just not suitable in London. Prince Charles used to fight this, i cannot understand how he miss this one. Other than this one is build by terrorist. In Londonistan, muslim is first class citizen.
-
IP addresses are NOT logged in this forum so there's no point asking. Please note that this forum is full of homophobes, racists, lunatics, schizophrenics & absolute nut jobs with a smattering of geniuses, Chinese chauvinists, Moderate Muslims and last but not least a couple of "know-it-alls" constantly sprouting their dubious wisdom. If you believe that content generated by unsavory characters might cause you offense PLEASE LEAVE NOW! Sammyboy Admin and Staff are not responsible for your hurt feelings should you choose to read any of the content here. The OTHER forum is HERE so please stop asking.
Why Prince Charles did not stop this monstrosity, ruining the view of London
- Thread starter singveld
- Start date
Exactly. Thank you. It just not suitable in London. Prince Charles used to fight this, i cannot understand how he miss this one. Other than this one is build by terrorist. In Londonistan, muslim is first class citizen.
This is proof that Islam is taking over Londonistan one tiny step at a time.
What UK citizen think of the shard.
http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/talk-about-anything/104652-shard-just-horrible.html
http://www.democracyforum.co.uk/talk-about-anything/104652-shard-just-horrible.html
Few large projects in London are built without controversy, and The Shard is no exception. Having Europe's tallest skyscraper in London wasn't the problem. It was just that many people didn't want to see it. Though Europe was a leader in creative architecture and skyline transformation in the late 20th century, by 2000 China had taken over that title, and the Europeans wanted skylines they felt were more classic, human, and European.
When it was first announced, plans called for a 1,200 foot tall £600,000,000 tower with 87 stories. The September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and elsewhere led the designers to put together a new plan. This one called for a smaller tower with faster escape routes and greater stability.
In spite of the fact that it retained its graceful shape, it was labeled "the shard of glass" by those who believed the modern skyscraper would tear a cultural gash across the London skyline by hiding views of Saint Paul's Cathedral. English Heritage complained that the skyscraper would be visible from the Tower of London, and that it would visually overpower the cathedral as well. Those fears were at least partially allayed by the Commission for Architecture and the Build Environment which said the tower would become an icon for the city, and not cause harm to the visual fabric of London.
How true those fears become will remain to be seen. For now, the drawings of the project do, indeed, depict a tower that pierces the sky, rather than maintaining the flat roofs and domes of other nearby structures. The building tapers as it gets higher, ending with an observation level topped by more levels of building mechanics.
Unlike most skyscrapers that feature a steel frame on a concrete base, this one uses a steel frame on the lower office floors and a concrete frame for the upper hotel and residential floors. The steel allows for longer column-free spans in office areas. And the concrete helps with soundproofing living areas. Having weighty concrete up high also offers a greater measure of wind resistance.
The building is to be covered with what the designers call "extra white" glass, which will reflect the sky more than most traditional skyscrapers. In effect, the upper levels will disappear in certain weather conditions. Moreover, as the light changes from season to season, so too will the appearance of the tower change.
When it was first announced, plans called for a 1,200 foot tall £600,000,000 tower with 87 stories. The September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and elsewhere led the designers to put together a new plan. This one called for a smaller tower with faster escape routes and greater stability.
In spite of the fact that it retained its graceful shape, it was labeled "the shard of glass" by those who believed the modern skyscraper would tear a cultural gash across the London skyline by hiding views of Saint Paul's Cathedral. English Heritage complained that the skyscraper would be visible from the Tower of London, and that it would visually overpower the cathedral as well. Those fears were at least partially allayed by the Commission for Architecture and the Build Environment which said the tower would become an icon for the city, and not cause harm to the visual fabric of London.
How true those fears become will remain to be seen. For now, the drawings of the project do, indeed, depict a tower that pierces the sky, rather than maintaining the flat roofs and domes of other nearby structures. The building tapers as it gets higher, ending with an observation level topped by more levels of building mechanics.
Unlike most skyscrapers that feature a steel frame on a concrete base, this one uses a steel frame on the lower office floors and a concrete frame for the upper hotel and residential floors. The steel allows for longer column-free spans in office areas. And the concrete helps with soundproofing living areas. Having weighty concrete up high also offers a greater measure of wind resistance.
The building is to be covered with what the designers call "extra white" glass, which will reflect the sky more than most traditional skyscrapers. In effect, the upper levels will disappear in certain weather conditions. Moreover, as the light changes from season to season, so too will the appearance of the tower change.
English Heritage criticized the plan at the outset dismissing London Bridge Tower as "a shard of glass." The name stuck and was eventually adopted as the building' official name.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even the naming of the building is taken from someone who criticize the building.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Even the naming of the building is taken from someone who criticize the building.
