London, like most major cities, has lots of skyscrapers. But unlike other cities, the skyscrapers have weird shapes and there is no compact, homogenous central business district. Every Londoner knows why that is the case and many people outside of London know why, too. But look closer and you see something else that is weird about the London skyline.
Wow, I didn't know any of this. Makes perfect sense (while being rather stupid, given the examples of ridiculous architecture you cite).
One more thing that seems weird to me is how 80% of London housing is in 2-3 storey buildings. Totally underbuilt space and inefficient, too -- just about every flat my daughter (who's been living in the city for about a decade) has had included a staircase, no matter how small the total area. Tokyo has small efficient houses, efficient streets and great public transport, and subsequent low housing costs. London in some respects seems to be the opposite?
You are correct about the bizzare and capricious UK planning system, which IMHO holds back the whole country GDP.
However high-status star architects resulting in higher buildings? could it not be that the causal link is the other way around i.e. these "stars" are more likely to get hired for the bigger and more prestigious projects rather than causing them to be big and prestigious?
Wow, I didn't know any of this. Makes perfect sense (while being rather stupid, given the examples of ridiculous architecture you cite).
One more thing that seems weird to me is how 80% of London housing is in 2-3 storey buildings. Totally underbuilt space and inefficient, too -- just about every flat my daughter (who's been living in the city for about a decade) has had included a staircase, no matter how small the total area. Tokyo has small efficient houses, efficient streets and great public transport, and subsequent low housing costs. London in some respects seems to be the opposite?
You are correct about the bizzare and capricious UK planning system, which IMHO holds back the whole country GDP.
However high-status star architects resulting in higher buildings? could it not be that the causal link is the other way around i.e. these "stars" are more likely to get hired for the bigger and more prestigious projects rather than causing them to be big and prestigious?