The Real Reason London's Skyscrapers Are Oddly Shaped - Cheddar Explains
Vložit
- čas přidán 21. 09. 2020
- London's skyline is spotted with several distinctly shaped skyscrapers. Londoners have awarded these unique building with some quirky nicknames including the Gherkin, the Shard, and the Cheesegrater. But these now iconic buildings weren't designed this way for purely aesthetic purposes.
Further reading:
Emporis www.emporis.com/buildings/138...
Historic England historicengland.org.uk/conten...
CNN www.cnn.com/2017/09/21/world/...
Metropolitics metropolitiques.eu/Skyline-po...
Office for National Statistics www.ons.gov.uk/
BBC www.bbc.com/news/uk-england-l...
Subscribe to Cheddar on CZcams: chdr.tv/subscribe
Connect with Cheddar!
On Facebook: chdr.tv/facebook
On Twitter: chdr.tv/twitter
On Instagram: chdr.tv/instagram
On Cheddar.com: chdr.tv/cheddar - Věda a technologie
There’s a story that a Parisian hated the Eiffel Tower, yet he had his lunch in the restaurant everyday. A friend asked him why, to which he said, ‘it’s the only place in Paris I can have my lunch and not see it’
It's the same reason I always recommend people go to the top of Rockefellers tower in New York instead of the Empire State. The Empire State is so iconic its actually a bit dissapointing when you get to the top, look out and realise you can't see the most famous skyscraper. It's better to go up rockefellers and get a great view of Central Park and the Empire State itself. Plus, from the street, Rockefellers is boring :)
There's a similar saying abut the Montparnasse tower : the best view of the tower is from atop, as you don't see it.
@@FlorentPlacide That tower is horrendously ugly though! Ruins Paris' skyline!
@@thebenedit I totally agree :)
I take it you are talking about the world renowned author Guy de Maupassant and not just some random anonymous Parisian.
Personally I like the unusual designs, the policy to protect St. Paul’s actually encourages designers to think outside the box.
Me to
It look like someone accidentally messed up the design and looks like some sort of frick you too you got some sort of different fetish man
I agree
I have to agree. I usually dont like restrictive policies, but so far this policy seems to be producing positive results: interesting building design, nice vistas and a respect for historical buildings.
thats the beauty of restrictions. It forces people to find another way.
Also, a majority of central London is built on soft clay and it’s been the advancement in building techniques over the last 20 years that has allowed skyscrapers to be built
Yes but you don't have to build skyscrapers that look like Darth Vader's dk.
lol
I like how each one of them is unique. No copypasted blocks, but actual creative design.
I feel like "creative" is giving them a bit too much credit. Basic geometric shapes are hardly all that new...
@@firstnamelastname7003 Im going to assume your American and say that your beloved now destroyed two cuboids were hardly special themselves (twin towers)
Turds are not creative dude, just a byproduct of metabolism
The empire state building looks special though @@mcdonaldspaperbag
We know you really wanted to make this video because it gives you an excuse to talk about cheese graters, isn't that right Cheddar?
Cheesegrater 2: Cheesier Than Thou
The channel is called *cheddar* :P
@@spheredude6003 no way?
..so London is going to have two cheese graters, the original one for Cheddar and the new one most likely for Cheshire.
The early phased array radar buildings in the sixties (for all I know, probably the new ones also) were shaped like a ten story or more, hundred foot or more wide, 45 degree cheese WEDGE! The 45 degree wall, facing in the direction to be surveilled, was filled with an array of thousands of antennas whose signal phases were computer controlled to electronically “point” in any direction. Today they are probably much more complex, but geometry would probably dictate a similar shape.
But of course, they aren’t located in a city, for security reasons! The one I toured in 1968 was on an Air Force Base in Florida. We got the censored declassified tour, of course.
I can't believe you didn't discuss the "walkie-talkie". The weirdest shaped building probably anywhere.
and it focuses sunlight on the street below, melting objects like car parts
@@tonyclifton265 Not anymore
@@TY-sx3jb how did they get rid of the problem?
@@hmalik5232 Changed the windows
@@TY-sx3jb I thought the issue was the curvature of the windows bending light and concentrating it, did they make the windows tinted or something?
London skyline is so unique compared to the majority of big cities. I hope that the unique designs continue whether or not all the corridors remain.
The chief planning officer looks like one of the chuckle brothers 😂
Surely we can't be the only people who think this?!
@@suzesweetness me too.
I’ve been looking for this comment
First thing that came to my mind lol
I thought I was the only one who thought that! 😂😂
Love how these big building companies say they need laws relaxed due to the housing crisis but oddly enough at the end of the project the extra affordable homes seem to almost disappear.
If people want affordable housing they shouldn't be moving to London, its the polar opposite of that.
@@grievuspwn4g3 So no cities and no country, so where are the UK residents supposed to live then?.
@@SecretOfMonkeyIsland784 with their parents. /j
@@SecretOfMonkeyIsland784 Once the developers have most of the land around you, they can often get councils to issue compulsory purchase against you so they can "benefit the area". I was nearly forced out of my home a few years ago. Many of us would not have been able to afford continuing to live in the place where we had grow up. The compensation would not have bought anything in the area at all.
If you are poor, they will throw you out of your own property and move you out of the area without any problem. It is often the case that poor people moved on in this way, have to then commute to work, which is expensive and time consuming (when they used to walk) or rent, which is a rip off.
Very true.They use housing as an excuse. As if they’ll provide affordable housing. The housing they provide is for the affluent and not for the masses.
Surprised that you didn’t mention the car-melting ‘Walkie-Talkie’.
Indeed, some poor person's lemons were scorched on a hot day, and a door mat was burned
Same here
The worse thing about the walkie talkie is it is the 2nd building designed by Rafael Viñoly that sets things on fire and melts cars twice a year.
iv always called it the popcorn building
@@pippylunalove actually, it wasn't his fault with the walkie talkie. He stipulated in his plans to angle the glass to avoid it. The engineers saw needless complexity and expense and so simplified it, putting back the error, as far as i understand it.
Being British and having been in the shard I think we can have both modern and old architecture. It's not albout the past otherwise we'd be protecting medieval cottages and nothing else. It's about balance and moving with the times.
London sucks dude
I agree however countries like France have done much better at protecting their skyline and heritage.
Or we could reject the highly modern hyper-capitalist ugliness
What 'times'? It's about human-scaled architecture, and fine craftsmanship. Neither are taught in architecture schools anymore, and haven't been for a long time.
The shard is one good looking skyscraper. I was totally in awe when i first saw it
that's what people say about my profile picture
@@FloridaMan69. shut up
Not one mention of the walkie talkie
The walkie talkie is the best out there
Was eagerly waiting
@Cringeyness Expressway learn how to spell
@Cringeyness Expressway well I never tried to be the real one
The challenge to justify it defeated the producer.
narrator: "something more concrete influenced their design"
* Cheddar logo pops onscreen*
me: cheese influenced the London skyline?
The Cheese grater.
0:50 I get the immediate impression she has recently shaved her monobrow.
It’s always the cheesiest things that influence everything.
The shard is my personal favorite…. It basically has double skin so it can breathe and white glass so it can project the weather.
And the fact that it’s useable 24-7 is amazing. Renzo Piano did an amazing job with that building.
It has a bit of a tendancy to melt cars but yeah
Plus the enormously increased wind at the bottom is horrid for commuters at London Bridge Station.
@@leahstone9938 You're thinking of the walkie-talkie.
The shard is beautiful
I literally work on this (Creating CGI images for planning purposes in London) And indeed, we always use the corridors as viewpoints to check St. Pauls. The intented design of all buildings in London tends to be "as tall and wide as you possibly can within the normative". So, thanks to the normative, we get these cool shapes!
I like the Gherkin. At least it looks like something nature would produce.
Get your mind out of the gutter.
its one of my favorite buildings to
It looks like a suppository pill
A turd?
All buildings look like something nature would produce in case you forgot that humans (that evolved here) build them out of materials mined from the earth itself.
2:17 - Oh hey, it's the "walkie-talkie", aka, the "death-ray building". The worst part about it is that its architect Rafael Viñoly made the exact same sun-focusing-magnifying-glass-like-death-ray mistake when he designed the Vdara in Las Vegas three years earlier but learned nothing. 🤦
U watched that video?
The walkie talkie is an absolute mess of a building that has totally negated all efforts to protect London's skyline
I worked on the walkie talkie . It was designed to have non reflective glass . The builder tried to save money and changed the glass which resulted in melted cars/pavements
If you're going to call the walkie-talkie by a more descriptive name, it's obvious the scorchy-talky
But the garden is nice
One iconic building you left out was The Post Office Tower completed in 1964 and is approx 190m tall and was the most visible building in London for many years
Some people like to collect unusual shaped toys of buildings
oh... OH
Do they vibrate?
@@chowderwhillis9448 Earthquakes
@@jeffscookies3236 lol true
*sits on the buildings*
lol - the 'tulip'. Just when you thought London's skyline couldn't get anymore phallic
that just a alien dick... the reason why they denide it later since they add that moving thing for tourist...
Planting tulips
czcams.com/video/2tY58GqluAs/video.html
@@radiocephalus7604 now there is no way in hell that's a coincidence.
It's slowly becoming Dalaran
I found the gherkin thing in my moms nightstand
Me moms also a skyscraper enthuasiast
Hahaha this made me laugh
Isn’t that rabbit rampant flag?
LOL! Don't worry. You're mom got rid of it, since she met me.
Lol
I love the mix of old and new in London. I drive around The City and Westminster a lot in the course of my work and it's a whole lot nicer than Canary Wharf (the former Docklands area redeveloped in the 80s and 90s) which is horrible and inorganic. However, to keep the mix of old and new from becoming a total junble, there has to be management and I genuinely think that by and large, they get it right most of the time.
I agree
I agree too. I admit I don't know it that well, but Canary Wharf to me is a strange place lacking clear "streets". I prefer the City. A gothic or Victorian church or a Georgian Square can sit next to a 700ft skyscraper, all on proper streets.
Also agree... I just hope the never build that 'tulip' it looks hideous! Resembles something you'd see in a x rated video.
Lucky you 🙏🏾🙏🏾🤗🤗🤗🤣
Nah, the "new" just sucks. And it's not new at all
Really surprised that BT Tower wasn't mentioned, went up in 1964 and is 620ft so pretty sure it qualifies (also it's pretty iconic.)
Definitely a number of other building they could have mentioned but assume they were mainly focusing on the City of London rather than Greater London (apart from the Shard of course)
It's also effing ugly. Plus we recently had to watch Prince Philip's face paraded around it like some sort of dance macabre.
@@firstnamelastname7003 it really looks fine
Critics called the Eiffel tower "ugly" when it first came out
who knows how these buildings will be treated like in the future
The Eiffel tower quite ugly
It's still ugly
The Eiffel Tower is a monument, not a purpose-built residence/business/mixed use.
The Eiffel Tower was never meant to be a permanent building anyway
I am from the future and the London skyline is still ugly.
1:56
The chuckle brothers were London’s best city planners
Yung Stallion OMG IT DOES LOOK LIKE ONE OF YHE CHUCKLE BROTHERS
RIP
I immediately did a double take on him lol
Maybe to you...
@@digitig to me
Pirate Tea Party To you.
One of the benefits of uninterrupted view corridors and uniquely shaped buildings, is that you can navigate the streets more easily without technology. Sometimes walking in busy city streets with your head in your phone is pretty bloody dangerous. Whereas if you know you’re aiming for “roughly near the spire” you can use the landmarks to make most of your way there.
"price out locals" mate they already have lmao, the gentrification of east London is real and it's sickening
Hitting outer london as well, houses here have quintupled in price over 20 years.
Locals should be given the utmost importance. Gentrification should be discouraged
Austin, TX has “capitol view corridors” that dictate that no buildings can be built within the direct line of sight of the capitol building from 26 different vantage points within the city of Austin. Pretty cool and results in some uniquely shaped buildings.
SLC has a road where you can see the capitol building from MILES away. 1 straight road for about 15-20 miles. (Covers 3/4 of the SLC valley.)
Road is called N State st.
And DC has a height limit on tall buildings
John Foltz same as most European cities like paris
You use to be able to see the Texas capitol on the I-35 elevated section.. not anymore.. must not be one of those 26 points..
Rosa Amarillo I know, it’s kind of sad, but there are still some spots on 35 where you can see the dome
Here's an idea: The Phallus, with a water fountain at the top. Complete with phallic features such as the Glans.
Add that fountain to the top of the tulip and you're basically there...
Have 2 sort of biospheres either side at the base of the building with plenty of bushes
Basically use a narrower version of the Gherkin design. Bonus points if it's accompanied by two low-rise domed buildings adjacent to it...
London doesn't have the balls to do it.
It was already proposed, it was called the tulip
London is such an extraordinary city, since skyscrapers will conquer it in the next few years anyway they should at least have attractive shapes and offer something interesting to honor the city. It's always been special, and hopefully always will be.
3:32 ,the way she says Buckingham Palace kills me
Bucking-heeyam?
Lmao the great fire of london brings back so many primary school history memories
It was actually the third 'Great Fire' of London, or possibly the fourth if you include Boudicca burning down Roman Londinium in 60 AD. There was one in 1135 and another in 1212.
What does LMAO mean?
I remember learning all about Samuel Peeps’ diary
@@tomk6292 _
Pronounced 'Peeps' but spelt 'Pepys'.
same 🥺
@@exiled_londoner LMAO means ‘laughing my ass off’
Personally, The weirdest of them all is the walkie talkie, the cheesgrater and gherkin are fine.
Cheese Grater looks okay. I wouldn't direct such praise towards Walkie Talkie and Buttpl... pardon me, Gherkin!
Neither of them fits to the surrounding city.
But I get your point. If all the skyscrapers were designed like Gherkin, the skyline would look pretty cool actually.
Whereas if they looked like walkie talkie, you would question your sanity and then burn alive shorty after.
I actually like 20 fenchurch street. In fact, its my favourite skyscraper.
@@greatportlandstreetmodelra6513 You most be either a masochist or have severe problems with your eyesight !!!
@@marshmarshall4619 I do admit, its a daring design, but it fits better than those „1000km“ high pillars without character.
A really strange thing with architects are how they only see one single building, while I, as a non-architect see all the buildings in my vicinity at the same time, and I see either, a mess, or something nice, usually I see the opposite of what an architect see I think
As somebody who is majoring in architectural design, this video was incredibly well put together. It’s interesting to see how people outside of the profession report/create educational content on it.
Client and Planners dictates what you design. You people are just AutoCAD junkies.
@@eljefesmotherislgbt3728 ha! Not at all.
As a Londoner myself I really like the protected views because it in many ways has led to more innovative building designs
Agreed, same thing happens with Vancouver and its view corridor restrictions. Ex: Vancouver House, looks like a shark took a bite out of the bottom.
trust me anything is better than build that just maximum the build area.. since it would be endless square... if you try to build in countryside.. you had to deal with old desgin and you can not do the differnt color let ago... differnt design...
Agreed. London's architecture has lately become really distinctive and fun, while preserving the status of our older buildings like St Paul's.
Two thoughts on tall buildings in London. Prior to the Natwest building, the tallest building in London was the 600-odd feet tall GPO Tower (now BT Tower). And in the Victorian period it was proposed to build a necropolis on Primrose Hill over London which would have been similar height as the Shard but nearly as wide as it was tall. Nicknamed the Pyramid of Death, it could have taken 5 million "burials".
Love the aerial views. Really puts the layout of London into perspective.
Once a year, pretty much every year of my life, i have stood where this camera is roughly 9:00 and looked at the city skyline, first of all this park (greenwich park) is one of my favorite places in the world so going there is no chore for me, but every couple of years the view changed, and I love watching it develop.
Fun fact: the form of the Empire States building is almost entirely decided by the NYC building code (setbacks and maximum distance between the building core and the facade etc.)
That’s probably why, except for the spire, it resembles the Chrysler building.
yeah it was accoding the road upfront.. same with some of my build there are hegith limited..
The sound quality is killing me
Quick, somebody get them a pop filter
I had to turn it super high to hear anything, and then all the sudden that guy’s at normal volume and I have to turn it way down.
@@michaelflaherty3202 thank you for the warning. The audio quality is so shitty.
The sound quality is still killing me
And I have to mention the vocal fry in the end of every sentence. I know I should be used to that by now, but I just can't.
1:54 "There was a chief planner in the city and he's name was Barry Chuckle"
The way American’s pronounce Buckingham makes me laugh every time - without fail
Makes me throw up 😂
Whatever you do, don't get them to say Leicester or Worcester ;)
It just sounds weird.
At least they know how to talk, unlike British people
@@BerryStraw15 Wotchoo talkin' abaht? I speak da Queens English dahnt I?
They should built modern buildings far apart from older buildings because it overshadow their historical areas that were there way before them.
It wouldn't be nice to have that type of skyline, it's not simply not balance by time or style.
However when you restrict too much you forego potentially immense innovations. What if the historical walk-up that is cherished now has major structural deficiencies and doesn't hold up to modern code? What if the lack of sustainability simply makes it unworthy to preserve? Even diamonds age, so what do you do? Preserve it? Destroy it without replacement? No? You break the ruler and build a new diamond.
In 400 years it will be completely balanced by its age. You must remember, those 'historical areas' contain buildings as old as the Tower of London (the oldest portion of which was built in 1066 CE) just streets away from the Leadenhall Market, which is in a building built in 1881 CE (to replace a building built in 1449 CE).
If the Gherkin is still standing in 2420 CE, an a 25th century building gets put up next to it, people may very well complain that "25th century architecture completely overshadows the historic 21st century architecture and throws the skyline off-balance". But London's entire charm is based off of old buildings near even older buildings near seemingly impossibly old buildings. It's a chain in which the newest links are modern structures.
This is why many historical metropoles have "New" and "Old" sections, allowing the history to live in harmony with the present
Separating old and new quarters works where the two districts have different purposes eg Hausmanns central Paris and La Défènce. In Londons case, the bombings from WW2 left a lot of empty sites. There's over a millennia of building in London so it's impossible to claim one style being more locally authentic than another. Keeping the skyline and overall visual aesthetics in mind for new buildings maintains a pleasant environment. Shape and scale matter more than style in this perspective.
Quite how the walkie talkie got through planning I've no idea. Its top heavy shape puts pressure on the area around it. Balanced sculptures don't have to narrow at the top. They do have to have a good relationship with the space around them. Height, mass and sightlines are part of this.
If you visited Seoul, you'd see an amazing example of old and new buildings coming together. For example from Gyeongbokgung palace, you are surrounded by sky scrapers but somehow it doesn't feel odd. It actually reflects the culture of the country: very modern but respectful of its past. Walking through London, the architecture flows pretty nicely most of the time and you find yourself going from Victorian areas to more modern ones without really noticing it.
It's a shame that londons already nice skyline from 3/4 years ago is unrecognizable today - the rate at which these scrapers are being built (north of the thames) doesn't allow for them to become iconic anymore
waffle
waffle
London has far too much 60s crap that’s damp and cold. 50s brick build slabs are not much better. I would say bulldoze the lot but would the replacement be any better? Certainly not with the authoritarian nutter we have running the city.
waffle
waffle
Awesome video! I've always wondered about this, and this video presentation was so interesting.
Really informative interesting video! Thank you for putting this together!
Yes, Tom Scott made a video on it 5 years ago: "The Sightlines of London"
Saw the title and instantly thought "its because of the cathedral", Thank You Tom from 5 years ago.
I personally like that the London skyline is distinct
7:56 oh no wonder I’m always able to see the mountains when walking down the road.
I live by the Thames and I personally love having that view of St Pauls. London has for me one of the best skylines in the world.
No,its gay
@@RedRocketthefirst it's happy?
Sounds like the policy continues to be a good thing as it protects views of an historic site while making the rest of the surrounding cityscape more interesting to look at.
Sounds like a win win to me! Hope to visit London someday to see these intriguing buildings and sites!
Those skyscrapers are pretty interesting individually but together they make a mishmash of the skyline.
Better than having our skyline look like a bloody Tetris level!
@@M1CAE1. not likely, more like a discordant mess that is the only thing that can look worse than some dull blocks. Absolutely the worst for sure
@@BeKindToBirds I disagree to me new york and most other metropolitan American cities look bland and uninteresting all the same tower copy and pasted block by block whereas London looks interesting and different y'know it looks like the architects actually did something instead of just copying the building next door
M1CAE1, lol are you British or something? Cause you said bloody which no others say lol 😂 anyways I have to agree, it looks really weird when their put together
@@shadowxxe sounds to me like you haven't examined the skyline in detail, just in basic shapes. In detail and style New York has hundreds of champions while London has ruined their stylish buildings with too tall and odd shapes that don't suit the old ornate kind of buildings.
I guess in the end it is a matter of opinion of course so I don't begrudge you liking the skyline I just think it was handled and done in a way that makes the new and old buildings both look like garbage instead of part of the same culture
Having watched the sun set over the city from Greenwich Observatory, it’s such an amazing view, and wonderful that you can still see St Paul’s from the observatory.
This makes me love my city so much more, everything is designed to not obstruct our oldest landmarks 😍
Nonsense. One day the Gherkin will be an old landmark, and people will cry and ask why it has been obstructed by so many skyscrapers around it
@@RuboStars I mean most skyscrapers look like shit so I would rather be able to see a nice looking old landmark than shit...
@@RuboStars I think skyscrapers are complemented by other skyscrapers around them. However old landmarks dont fit in with skyscrapers so they shouldnt be obstructed.
@@thetimelapseguy8 I agree. With some cities which became industrialised and important a bit later (e.g: Hong Kong, Taibei) Have skyscrapers that look pretty good because they work with the rest of the environment because it was all designed at a similar time. My opinion at least.
As an atheist, I have no need for religious buildings, but as a Londoner and a lover of architecture, I believe the view of St. Paul's is an important one. You can see it all over the city and it's a quirky rule that makes for interesting, new buildings.
It’s easy to tell when someone is atheist because it’s always the first thing they’ll tell you
@@gumbyshrimp2606 Great story. Perhaps one day you'll be able to work it into an anecdote
@Steven Moore It's the first time I've ever mentioned it publicly and only to demonstrate how important St. Paul's is to London's landscape. I find that most atheists don't talk about atheism as we're not devoted to a cult - it's simply a release from that. Saying something is true doesn't make it so - that's the problem with religion!
@@RefractedWorld another point is that mostly in media, movies, tv shows , ect. you never see the effect of the strict rules on skylines and sight lines. but at ground level its pretty noticeable from a lot of places.
@Steven Moore I know you're referring to a part of the bible but it's amusing that CZcams interpreted that to mean 18:20 in the video.
"The Jerkin' Gherkin"
-Rimmy Downunder
No, it’s not ISP, Its Jimmy Downunder
@@guymandude9054 my mistake, i have fixed it
I love London. I feel like it sets itself apart from all other major cities that just give way to skyscrapers. Tall buildings really just swallow up everything around them and take away from that "home" feeling you get from smaller structures. I love the views of St. Paul's and I think it should be preserved.
I love this channel, so informative.
CZcams: hey wanna see some weirdly shaped buildings?
Me: Yea why not
Australia’s the opera house was considered ugly when it was finished and was hated by a lot of people. Now it’s an iconic symbol to reflect boats sails at sea, and when you see it in person it’s a stunning bit of architecture that will forever by iconic to Sydney
This has been more interesting than expected!
I have one of the best view's in London from my bedroom window. I live in East London in Whitechapel and can see this whole skyline. Looks great especially at night. The new Royal London Hospital building is also visible and I can watch and hear the air ambulance take off and land.
😍😍
@@ladytee4269 you want to see it? 😉
the walkie talkie is still ugly. there's no harmony with the rest of the city
extra bread no pickle yeah that’s the only one I don’t find aesthetically pleasing as well
czcams.com/video/hlRNO8xcrgU/video.html
Can’t argue it has a cracking sky garden though with some of the best views!
It melted cars
It's my favorite one for that same reason, it's the one that stands out the most.
I love how americans say "Vancouver, Canada" like we don't have provinces and territories, but yet americans can say "San Francisco" and we have to know what state it's in
I don't know why they don't say "British Columbia", but a reason they might not just say Vancouver is because there is another Vancouver in Washington state.
There is also a Vancouver in Washington
Yea I know that, but it's the same for "Toronto" or even "Edmonton"
And Sweden is mostly only Stockholm to tourists and or others from outside Sweden.
The rest of Sweden, outside Stockholm, what's that? A nickname for Switzerland? Is outside Stockholm Switzerland?
@@succotash6732 This video is produced primarily for a domestic audience. It's normal to refer to foreign cities with the city name first followed by the country.
Super interesting vid, thanks!
My favorite thing about London is that mix of history with modern and odd design! It’s so beautiful and a reflection of change 🤩 no other city has the same vibe
Many European cities mix history with innovative/quirky modern architecture, London has an iconic skyline because they're grouped but I don't think it's particularly special. Yes, it has it's own vibe but you could say that of lots of places.
In Munich within our Middle Ring (its really called that in german), no Building must be taller than our Frauenkirchen, in the middle of the City. And when you look from far enough it really looks great that we dont have many skyscrapers.
I would prefer Munich to have any sort of a skyline regardless of the Frauenkirche tbh... I get that it's iconic but it looks kinda ugly in my humble opinion
@@lex_9940 splish splash your opinion is trash
@@lex_9940 Ugly?! So, do you think that a lifeless glass cube is prettier?
@@fmartinave Well to me it would definitely look more aesthetic and modern. But than again I'm not German so maybe i don't appreciate the culture as much as i should.
@@lex_9940 I'm not a German too, but every city there (expect a dozen thankfully) is full of those annoying Modernist and Post War buildings...
We Londoners love our city as it is. Skyscrapers and residential blocks can come up in still untapped parts of London. Leave the historic parts aloneness
The Green Belt?
heathrows 3rd runway?
skyscraper also part of tourist plan since you go somewhere it a landmark... so a unique desgn would get appved more than just build that just max the area...
@The Anonymous Sir Backspace who care.. the london fire destory most old build away and ww2 do the other so the rest is less than 100 years old..any older would not be effect like some area in countryside that you can not build anything new ...
You might want to just speak for yourself. You don't carry the entire opinion of all London natives.
Fascinating stuff, seriously. I had no idea and I'm from the UK... Thanks for a fine and interesting video.
I love the Gherkin. It gives me a sense of orientation and as someone who's mostly lived in East or North East London it helps me know when I'm near home.
1:12 I love Canary Wharf tower (one Canada square), in fact I love the whole area... it has this clean city feel about it, almost like no where else in London but at the same time it’s so Londoney with its tube station and DLR and red busses... btw I live in the UK outside of London and in most places outside London busses aren’t red.
The HSBC building is a very nice looking skyscraper.
I agree, and the view from Greenwich hill with the palace inbetween is amazing.
It's a soulless place with boring grey buildings. Wouldn't live there, wouldn't work there.
@@kristofkozari9040 wouldn’t live anywhere in London... no headspace but I love to visit, get a buzz from it, then return home to my peaceful town of 30k people
"London didn't start building skyscrapers till the 80's"
well apart from the ones in the 60's and 70's (Center point? Euston Tower?)
BT Tower as well.
skyscraper > 150m ...
@@Fullvinyl BT Tower isn't defined as a skyscraper or building at all. It's a structure.
You forgot the 30's with senate house.
and the Nat West tower was started in he 1970s.
Great video, I really enjoyed that
Reminds me of my hometown here in Las Cruces, NM. We have sky scraper restrictions to keep the skyline clear to preserve the beautiful view of the organ mountains. Which you can see from any part of the city. Not that we’re a big enough city to have huge sky scrapers, but we have interesting looking buildings that were supposed to be tall so I wonder if they look as interesting as they do because of the restrictions
An incorrection at the beginning. It's laterally called The Shard, that's its official name
They are talking about a different building.
Agree. The Shard is the official name so wrong example
Definitely think the sightlines for St Paul's should continue. I think they should add new protected sightlines for The Gherkin. There are so many other developments in the area that The Gherkin is disappearing from the skyline in some places due to taller buildings over shadowing it.
The Gherking is hideous, it would be far from a bad thing if it got replaced by other buildings in the skyline
Great video! Any thoughts on the new Bishopsgate? Originally it would be “the spiral” and have a dragon coming around it 🐉 now it’s... mostly tall and super thick!
You forgot several, the Empress State in Hammersmith, Centre Point in Soho, and the oldest of the lot UOL's Senate House.
Thank you for a very informative video. I am all for preservation. You can build new cities from scratch but you should respect and maintain old cities’ architecture. The new towers seem to be of phallic proportions and I don’t think they gel well together.
Very sorry, if one's mindset is so strongly sexualised as to perceive the Gherkin, Shard, and Cheesegrater as of phallic proportions, then any skyscraper will appear phallic, as will anything that is long and thin, including corn cobs, cucumbers, even fingers, fence posts and candles.
I said the exact same thing but with 10 times more words.
@@castelodeossos3947 I’m reading comments saying skyscrapers are completely unnecessary. Even tower blocks. Because they are.
From where I live in London, I get a pretty good view of the city of London's buildings. During the construction of one building, I believed for the longest time that they had arranged the glass on it to look like a giant play button. It was 6 months before I found out that it's actually two buildings and just because of the angle of my view in New Cross, the roof of one building perfectly overlays the front of a much larger building to make it look like the button.
I like to believe that this was intentional.
This makes me wanna visit London even more
New York: Empire State Building, Chrysler Building
Chicago: Sears Tower, John Hancock Center
San Francisco: Transamerica Pyramid, Salesforce Tower
London: ChEEsEgRatEr, CHeESeGrAtEr 2
I love this kind of educational mini-docu content! I also find these single-person home-studio productions much more personal, intimate and authentic somehow. Thanks COVID, I guess? :)
Channel recommendation if you like this kind of stuff: The B1M
my channel too btw 😛
Yess. From UK
They have a good channel but it seems like every other video of theirs is a paid sponsorship now...
@@patsprankcalls Agreed! Their old videos were much more in this documentary style.
Thank you for adding the little metric conversion tags.
Me and a friend got stranded at night so we walked around st pauls and the skyscrapers around it, it was beautiful seeing everything lit up all night but terrifying at the same time, as soon as it hit 5am we caught the first train back!
As a Londoner I love learning where the shapes of these building came from! Also I’d love to find out what the proposal is for these skyscrapers post pandemic, when working from home will be a new preference for many people, and coming into the City to work in one fo these building may not be needed as much.
Ok. But make better infrastructure
I still believe in the concept that limits boost creativity.
Pretty much always. Without limits we would just get literally tall boxes.
Good video - only error is at around 3:39 - it's not that it blocked her view of Buckingham Palace - it blocked her view from there of St Paul's Cathedral - that's the protected sightline, not of Buckingham Palace
i like the idea of one building distinguish building being seen miles away in all direction. will certainly help people find their way easier.
I'm glad that in London it encourages interesting skyscrapers unlike the glass box forest in Toronto.
John Peric rectangular boxes are not aesthetically pleasing. And they are also not more efficient.
You just haven't been in like a residential tower that over looks shorter office towers. You feel on top of the world
To be fair london also do have ‘glass box forests’ :
www.thetimes.co.uk/imageserver/image/%2Fmethode%2Fsundaytimes%2Fprod%2Fweb%2Fbin%2F102dbdf2-d3f7-11ea-867d-b1ae14c05a8c.jpg?crop=2250%2C1500%2C0%2C0
There's no such thing as an interesting skyscraper.
@@jenniferlawrence2701 I beg to differ
One city incredibly effected by protected views is Paris, where strict height restrictions protect the historic centre of the city from skyscrapers and protect the views of the Eiffel Tower.
Ok. But fr*nce sucks
I also realised the BT Tower also has a similar passage to St. Paul’s Cathedral
I've seen the Walkie-Talkie many times in this video (it's close to the Gherkin), but not a single mention.
It has the magic power (a concave reflective surface) to lit up cars and doormats around itself when the sun shines from a certain direction.
I've been here once and honestly, the London skyline was mind blowingly cool to me.
i living in tokyo and i found it a mess...
@Sainayoro the gherkin and cheese grater are complete shit, I could see the others possibly working but it’s still eh
Great article about architecture, art, and engineering! She always makes interesting reports I have noticed! Thx Chris!
I like the building policy of Toronto in the 70’s. “We need a really tall tower so everyone can watch TV”.
CN Railways: “Hold my beer, eh.”
I hope Londoners retain the policy of keeping vistas of the dome open. It just seems like the right thing to do. Plus, it's resulted in some interesting architecture.