Å·±¦ÓéÀÖ

Salisbury Cathedral, The Shard (with a cross) and the Albert Memorial as Christian architectural symbols in an urban landscape

If you build a skyscaper in London you can expect a shovel of reviews. Here is a selection of opinions about the symbolic impact of Renzo Piano’s Shard on London’s landscape.

Tom Turner: If The Shard had a Christian cross on top most of the critics would change their minds

Nathan Hurst: The Shard is an irregular pyramid with a glass exterior, evoking a shard of glass.

Fergus Feilden: I find the Shard lacks soul

Richard Rogers: The Shard is the most beautiful addition to the London skyline.

Owen Hatherley: The Shard is rammed unforgivingly into Southwark

Peter Buchanan: The Shard is much too big, as is Piano’s building rising beside it, and completely out of character with the surrounding area � the evocation of spires and sails is fatuous.

Simon Jenkins: This tower is anarchy. It conforms to no planning policy. It marks no architectural focus or rond-point.

Paul Finch: Like any icon, the Shard demands attention and has received it in spades from London cab drivers (split views), architects (benefit of the doubt), and the non-fraternity of architectural critics puzzled by this south-of-the-Thames phenomenon.

Terry Farrell: In its overall shape, the tower is to my mind a bit of a 1960s Dan Dare version but as with all Renzo’s buildings it has its own elegance.

Simon Allford: I am delighted to see it standing tall on the skyline in an unexpected place confidently breaking rules.

Patrik Schumacher: The form is insufficiently motivated. The project seems to sacrifice efficiency for the formal purity of the pyramid.

Jonathan Glancey: The Shard is in the wrong place. It would be better off in Shanghai or Dubai.

Aditya Chakrabortty: It’s expensive. It’s off-limits. It’s largely owned by people who don’t live here. And it is the perfect metaphor for what our capital is becoming.

Chris Leadbeater: Henry VIII would be furious. Apoplectic. Red-faced with rage. Heads would surely roll.

Underneath it all, London remains a city of spires: St Paul

My guess is reviewers can be placed in two camps: left-wing and right-wing. Aesthetic conservatives would be happy to see a traditional spire towering of London, as the spire of once did. Aesthetic lefties enjoy breaks with tradition and feel sick at the use of a traditional building forms in the twenty-first century. Both groups of critics are happy to sneer at Towers of Mamon and/or at foreign involvement in London. Symbols have a profound influence on aesthetic judgements. While the UK economy has languished for a century, London’s economy has rarely paused since the time of Henry VII. It remains one of the most financially productive places on earth and subsidises what remains of the British Empire (including the North of England, Scotland, Wales and Northern Ireland.)

The worst view of The Shard is More London in the foreground. It is dissonant ('in the musical sense of 'a combination of notes that sound harsh or unpleasant '). Is the red arm removing a speck of dust from Lord Foster's eyeball?

I had a short walk and ride around the City of London at the weekend. It is an unusual place and, though I have never had the experience, thought about beingÌý in a crevasse. The City has a medieval street pattern overlaid on a Roman street pattern. It can’t be changed and land values are sky high. So they keep building higher and with steel and glass. You might think this would produce gloomy canyons but, in fact, there is a phenomenon akin to total internal reflection, as in a ‘sun tubeâ€�, which brings light down to street level. The odd aspect of this is that the light is normally less-bright than sunlight and has a ghostly quality (as when sun shines through ice). An exception results from the Walkie Talkie.

As it neared completion in 2013 Rafael Viñoly Architects design for 20 Fenchurch Street began to act as a solar mirror. It focused so much sun in the pavements that it became possible to fry eggs. Londoners therefore changed its name to Walkie Talkie Scorchie � though Fryscraper is a popular alternative. The above video begins where Lovat Lane runs south from Eastcheap � so the sunlight is coming from the north! It shows the once-dark alley blazing with solar glare. Viñoly should have known better: he had the same problem with the Vdara skyscraper in Las Vegas. The effect is known as a ‘death ray� but, properly directed, the sunlight reflected from tall buildings can be a welcome addition to dark pedestrian spaces.

ÌýViñoly’s response to the problem has been to point his fingers and toes at other consultants. He whines that [in London] ‘the superabundance of consultants and sub consultants dilute the responsibility of the designers until you don’t know where you areâ€� so that ‘architects aren’t architects anymoreâ€�. In truth, he did not have the right consultants. What he needed was a physicist to calculate what would happen and a landscape architect to make best-possible use of the reflected light. Gillespies are working on the design of the Fenchurch Street Skygarden and I am sure they would have been pleased to help out with the street level design problem.

Architects (notably Richard Rogers) often argue that high buildings save the green belt, save on transport infrastructure and are good for sustainability. All true but this does not mean tall buildings are always best. Simon Jenkins tried to discuss them at the RIBAÌý and reached the conclusion that ‘Talking towers with London architects is like talking disarmament with the National Rifle Association. A skyscraper seems every builder’s dream. At a Royal Institute of British Architects seminar on the subject last April, I faced an audience almost entirely of architects who treated any criticism of tall buildings as nothing to do with aesthetics or urban culture but to do with denying them money.’Ì� An expert House of Commons committee (2001-2) and the City’s Chief Planning Officer (Peter Rees) argue that high buildings are unnecessary and undesirable â€� because similar densities can be achieved by other means.

The planning and design of tall buildings should form part of an imaginative scenic conception of the future urban landscapes they will help create. Conservation is not enough. Innovation is not enough. Past and future concepts must be brought into harmony. This requires design imagination.

Modern landscape architecture, Tehran, Iran

I share the general optimism about Iran’s new President, Hassan Rouhani, and Iran’s future. Many of the country’s problems were caused by western interventions. Others are indigenous. My own experience of Iranians is that they are kind, courteous and peaceful. This has made it difficult for me to understand their demonisation in the west. The new President has both liberal and authoritarian credentials. He gained a PhD in ‘no mean city�: Glasgow. He wear’s a cleric’s clothes and buys from Armani (I do not know how this is possible). If you are also wondering what relevance this has for this blog then I recommend Louise Wickham’s interesting book on Gardens in History: A Political Perspective. Garden design, like urban design, has always been influenced by politics. You can read something of Iran’s last half-century in the above photograph. The design is inoffensive: a little Iranian, a little European, a little modern and not much of anything. So my modest suggestion, assuming President Rouhani reads this blog, is to show your people what you can do for them by encouraging them to draw on the best of Iran’s traditions and the best of contemporary landscape, garden and urban design wheresoever in the world then can be found.

Photo (courtesy ) of Park-e Laleh, Jamshīdīyeh, Tehran, Tehran, Iran.

Is the visual impact of Europe's tallest building on London's skyline good or bad?

Does The Shard have a positive or negative visual impact on this view of London’s river skyline ? The above photos are 180° panoramic views from Southwark Bridge and little spiky building in front of The Shard is Southwark Cathedral (unlike St Paul’s, it is not connected). Camillo Sitte said the ratio ofÌý height:width of a city square should range between 1:1 and 1:2. Is this relevant to buildings near London’s river? The Shard is 306m high and the Thames at London Bridge 265 metres wide. This gives us a ratio ofÌý 1:1.5. The Shard isÌý 150m from the river. Sitte wrote that “We find…that the height of its principal building, taken once, can be declared to be roughly the minimum dimension for a plaza, the absolute maximum that still gives a good effect being the double of that height â€� provided that the general shape of the building, its purpose, and its detailing do not permit exceptional dimensions.â€�

Junk Urban Landscape: the Walkie Talkie, the Cheesgrater and the Gherkin are waiting for The Kettle

Postmodern urban landscape design

The words and image (from City as landscape p. 6) were published in 1996. Sadly, I forgot that most designers look at books only for their pictures. Nor did I imagine that London’s designers would see my cartoon as the latest hot trend in urban design. Tragically, as you can see from the 2013 photograph the City of London (above, top), they are hell bent on building the cartoon. But I WAS JOKING. It was not a design proposal. I did not want it to be built. I regret that it is being built. I APOLOGISE TO LONDONERS AND TO LONDON’S URBAN LANDSCAPE. I should have listened to my grandfather: “Take care with whom you joke�.

Regarding the design of the Big Three newbies in the above photo, I think people are right to use simple domestic analogies when GIVING them NAMES. I have no particular dislike, or love, for the buildings. But why on earth didn’t their designers cooperate to compose a harmonious skyline? And why didn’t the town planners make any useful suggestions? And what did the Landscape Institute say about skyline policy? And what happened to form following function? And why are the cladding materials non-functional? They do not generate energy; they make no contribution to surface water management; they are unvegetated; there have no roof gardens; they do nothing for biodiversity. They probably won’t have any bike parking.

Environmentally, the Walkie Talkie may be the best of the three sisters. I can imagine a new urban quarter looking more like mushrooms than matchboxes. The Walkie Talkie’s power supply will come from a natural gas fuel cell. The ‘cap� of the fungus has both an indoor garden and an outdoor viewing terrace. Best of all, the south-facing curved facade concentrates the sunlight so that pedestrians can .

Richard Rogersâ€� Cheese Grater was so-named by the City of London’s chief planner. He recounts that ‘When I first saw a model of the building, I told Richard Rogers I could imagine his wife, Ruthie, using it to grate parmesan. I don’t think he was too happy, but it stuck.â€� The developers did not want their buildingÌý to be wedge-shaped. It cost them a lot in floorspace and was done to lessen obstruction to views of St Paul’s Cathedral. To me, the views of St Paul’s which matter are those from the Thames â€� so I think this was an insufficient reason for a cheesy design. Pun intended: cheesy also means ‘Trying too hard, unsubtle, and inauthenticâ€�. And why worry so much the relatively modern cathedral when the Walkie Talkie has such an unfortunate impact on a building of much more historical, architectural and landscape significance: the Tower of London? (see below)

The Walkie Talkie towers over the Tower of London

.

British people care about skylines but the official debate is mostly about the more limited topic of ‘high buildingsâ€�. Height is important but it is only one aspect of scenic composition. Wiki has thisÌý and About.com has a list of :

Unity: Do all the parts of the composition feel as if they belong together, or does something feel stuck on, awkwardly out of place?

Balance: Having a symmetrical arrangement adds a sense of calm, whereas an asymmetrical arrangement creates a sense of unease, imbalance. (See example)

Movement: There many ways to give a sense of movement in a painting, such as the arrangement of objects, the position of figures, the flow of a river. (See example

Rhythm: In much the same way music does, a piece of art can have a rhythm or underlying beat that leads and paces the eye as you look at it. Look for the large underlying shapes (squares, triangles, etc.) and repeated color. (See example)

Focus (or Emphasis): The viewer’s eye ultimately wants to rest of the “most important� thing or focal point in the painting, otherwise the eye feels lost, wandering around in space. (See example)

Contrast: Strong differences between light and dark, or minimal, such as Whistler did in his Nocturne series. (See example)

Pattern: An underlying structure, the basic lines and shapes in the composition.

Proportion: How things fit together, big and small, nearby and distant.

I would like to see these principles applied in the composition of skylines but they relate only to aesthetic matters. In accordance with Vitruvius, we should be think about Commodity and Firmness, as well as Delight.

Here is a selection of links to pdf documents dealing with High Buildings and Skyline Policy in the UK. Most of them concentrate on the narrow issue of high buildings:

Greater London Authority GLA 2001 [This report was issued by Ken Livingston. It was based on the 1998 London Planning Advisory Committee LPAC High Buildings and Strategic Views in London but watered down. Ken was soft on high buildings]
House of Commons report on (2001-2) has a very good history of high buildings policy in the UK and much expert opinion on the subject
Chapter 4 of Boris Johnson’s London Plan 2008 dealt with .Ìý I am unsure whether this also forms part of the 2011 London Plan.Ìý Boris is said to be much softer than Ken on high buildings.
The Ìý ( Colvin & Moggridge, Landscape Consultants, 2010) exemplifiesÌý the type of skyline study London should have. But conservation is not enough. We need imaginative contingency plans for the changes which MAY affect to London’s urban scenery and skylines.

Draft (also called high buildings or skyscrpers)

Richmond exemplifies the best in London Open Space Planning � and can inspire a new green space infrastructure strategy

The Gardenvisit.com website has a history of, and commentary upon, . It was written and published about ten years ago and is due for an update. While this is in hand, we offer links to several pdf documents:

Download pdf of article Town Planning Review 63(4) 1992 (the first page is )
Download a free pdf copy of John Claudius Loudon’s 1829 � a landscape architecture and open space plan for London.
Download a free pdf copy of the 1943-4
Download a free pdf copy of 1992
Download a free pdf copy of the Ìý (2004-5)ÌýÌý Green Grid Partnership and LDA Design (was the director in charge at Landscape Design Associates)
Download a free pdf copy of the Greater London Authority’s 2008
Download a free pdf copy of the Greater London Authority’s 2012

The diagrams, below, show the open space/green infrastructure diagrams from the Country of London Plan and the 1991 Green Strategy.Ìý From 1951 to 1991 London open space planning was dominated by the modernist idea of an open space deficiency â€� which should be corrected by a hierarchy of small, medium and large parks. The odd, and unstated, implication of the ‘deficiencyâ€� concept is that there should be large-scale demolitions in the London Borough of Islington (which has ) and large-scale building on open space in the London Borough of Richmond upon Thames (which has ). I’d like to see the results of public consultation on these ideas â€� they are wealthy boroughs with highly articulate residents. In 2013 the average house price wasÌý£545,301 in Islington and inÌý£614,633 in Richmond. Could the profit on selling park land in Richmond could go to buying park land in Islington? Or was the concept of open space deficiency stupid in 1951 and absurd in 2013? One-word comments welcome!

Abercrombie’s idea that open spaces should be connected slept from 1943-1991 but has been revived and is now embodied in the idea of making a ‘Green Gridâ€�. This term appeared in the Thames Gateway South Essex Green Grid Strategy and is now formalised in the All London Green Grid. Personally, I would rather it was described as a Green Web. Its primary geometries should be more circular and centripetal than rectangular. As a Germanic word, used to describe the product of weaving, a ‘webâ€� entails the use of overlapping strands (as in the green gtrategy diagram, below). The concept also gains from association with the spiders and caterpillars, which make organic and non-rectangular webs of great strength and flexibility, and from other biological use to describe ‘a tissue or membrane in an animal body or in a plantâ€�. Also in 1991, 1991ÌýÌý . He wrote that ‘The web contains documents in many formats. Those documents which areÌý

hypertext, Ìý(real or virtual) contain links to other documents, or placesÌý within documentsâ€�. Comparably, I think of a Green Web as having overlapping strands which inter-link different kinds of space which are green in the sense of ‘good from an environmental point of viewâ€�. Some of the links and spaces should be green in the sense of ‘vegetatedâ€�. Others should be water bodies, urban squares, streets and cycleways â€� which may, or may not, contain green plants.

London Open Space Plan, Park System and Green Infrastructure Stragety

Ìý