The Pinnacle Starts...

[Crispy]

Not to be outdone by that spikey newcomer on the South Bank, London's second tallest skyscraper-to-be is under construction. The Bishopsgate Tower, aka The Pinnacle, aka The Helter Skelter (enough crazy nicknames please), will be over 288m tall and has a 'snakeskin' cladding of overlapping glass panels over its curved form. It finishes with a spiral to a spire and is quite a looker, if you ask me.

It's got a very irregular floorplan that completely fills the site, so from some directions (as above) it will look very slender, but from others maybe a bit fat.

Anyway, it's currently a big hole in the ground, but the concrete core is above ground floor now and is poised to race upwards once the basements are complete.

Should be yet another icnoic landmark on London's horizon!

 

[teuchter]

Good work Mr Crispy

Kohn Pederson Fox are the designers if anyone wants to peruse their previous projects.

 

[gabi]

When did London drop the no-skyscraper policy? Was it ever in fact actually official?

I like the City how it is, I dont want it be like manhattan thanks!

 

[teuchter]

Same here, actually.

 

[Crispy]

London is very limited in where it can have tall buildings, due to protected sightlines of St. Pauls, Tower of London and the Houses of Parliament.

http://test.citydesigner.com/uploads/project/38_Before_Pop-Up-Map-NEW.jpg

In this image, red is where you can't build tall in front of the landmark, then tan is where you can't build behind.

As a result, it will never be like Manhattan - tall buildings are very tightly herded. Peter Rees (CoL head of Planning) has been in the post for 25 years and is responsible for the "cluster of icons" approach to tall buildings in The City - his POV is that with restricted sites for tall buildings, they had better be damn special when you build them.

After Pinnacle, there are very few sites left in the area that can still support similar heights. 122 Leadenhall (The Cheesegrater) has planning approval, but doesn't have the money behind it yet. There's the possiblity of a tall building near Shoreditch station, in a gap in the protected sightlines. However, nothing in London will be taller than Shard/Pinnacle due to FAA rules about intruding on airspace for the London City Airport approach.

 

[Crispy]

Oh, but let's not talk about 20 fenchurch street, which is hideous, and I hope the project collapses in financial ruin

 

[TitanSound]

Oh, but let's not talk about 20 fenchurch street, which is hideous, and I hope the project collapses in financial ruin

Just had a quick peek on Google and yes, I agree

 

[Biddlybee]

I'm sure there was more done on it than that when I went pas ton the bus on Saturday

 

[Crispy]

The Heron is just up the road, which looks like this:

And is pretty much externally complete. You might have mistaken it?
Or maybe you saw the Shard?

 

[Crispy]

Just had a quick peek on Google and yes, I agree

Awful isn't it? That garden in the roof is open to the public for free, which redeems it a little bit, but it's too bulky and too close to the river. Terrible, terrible building.

 

[Biddlybee]

The Heron is just up the road, which looks like this:

And is pretty much externally complete. You might have mistaken it?
Or maybe you saw the Shard?

I did see the shard (but I know that's in London Bridge ), was definitely the Pinnacle on Bishopsgate, they'd shut half the road because there was a great big machine (not a crane) doing something. It just seemed a more done than the pic in your OP... maybe its the angle

 

[teuchter]

London is very limited in where it can have tall buildings, due to protected sightlines of St. Pauls, Tower of London and the Houses of Parliament.

http://test.citydesigner.com/uploads/project/38_Before_Pop-Up-Map-NEW.jpg

In this image, red is where you can't build tall in front of the landmark, then tan is where you can't build behind.

As a result, it will never be like Manhattan - tall buildings are very tightly herded. Peter Rees (CoL head of Planning) has been in the post for 25 years and is responsible for the "cluster of icons" approach to tall buildings in The City - his POV is that with restricted sites for tall buildings, they had better be damn special when you build them.

After Pinnacle, there are very few sites left in the area that can still support similar heights. 122 Leadenhall (The Cheesegrater) has planning approval, but doesn't have the money behind it yet. There's the possiblity of a tall building near Shoreditch station, in a gap in the protected sightlines. However, nothing in London will be taller than Shard/Pinnacle due to FAA rules about intruding on airspace for the London City Airport approach.

It always strikes me as a kind of archaic way to decide where tall buildings should or shouldn't go, the whole protected sightlines thing. Designing a city on the basis of protecting views of a very few (arbitarily selected?) buildings from a very few (arbitarily selected?) viewpoints. The views don't seem to have much to do with the way most Londoners experience their city. For example, how much of most peoples' time in London is spent sitting on Primrose Hill compared to, say, sitting on a bus going along the Strand? And why is the Tower of London considered more interesting to look at than Battersea Power Station? Also note that North London gets lots of protected views but not south London except for round Greenwich which is presumably just because some old Naval commanders kicked up a fuss at some point in history, or something.

Maybe, though, it's just a weird tool that happens to produce reasonably acceptable results.

The idea of a few tight clusters is OK as long as it's strictly stuck to as a principle. There will always be the temptation to add just one or two more towers here and there, and if that happens eventually the idea of the clusters will be lost.

 

[TitanSound]

Awful isn't it? That garden in the roof is open to the public for free, which redeems it a little bit, but it's too bulky and too close to the river. Terrible, terrible building.

Aye. It just looks out of place. Something like the Gherkin, fine. But 20 Fenchurch just looks odd!

 

[quimcunx]

20 fenchurch street reminds me of this guy:

top heavy.

 

[editor]

Annoyingly, it looks like the Pinnacle will be another block I can't see from my window (well, I'll probably just see the top).

 

[teuchter]

Seems to be a trend

.
.
.
.

.
.
.

.

 

[cybertect]

I have a few pics of this already. Very impressive basement works.

November 2009

December 2009

April 2010

I've been a bit distracted by The Shard since - should really get back over the river for another look-see

 

[bromley]

I've been saying this for a long time on this forum but the pinnacle is truely stunning, far more aesthetically pleasing than The Shard IMO. Really looking forward to seeing this one rise from the ground! I hope 20 fenchurch street, doesn't block it, it's too big.

Anyone else think the Helter Skelter looks more like a flick knife or have I got problems?!

 

[FridgeMagnet]

It's better than the Philishave, certainly, which remains a fucking travesty. I'm afraid I generally still think skyscrapers are dull wastes of money for dull people with money to waste, but at least it looks like some sort of obscure glass fountain pen design, which can't be bad.

 

[ska invita]

ive been telling everyone for years that you werent allowed to build taller than StPauls until THATCHER ripped up the law and spat on it etc etc. I just realised i have no idea if its true or where i heard that. is it true?

 

[sleaterkinney]

Oh, but let's not talk about 20 fenchurch street, which is hideous, and I hope the project collapses in financial ruin

With those two big office blocks going up plus isn't there another one across the road from lloyds that's on hold?, there won't be much demand, but it is a piece of valuable real estate...

 

[cybertect]

I just realised i have no idea if its true or where i heard that. is it true?

No. It never was true.

St Paul's is 111m tall.

The City's tallest building for many years, the NatWest Tower (AKA Tower 42) began construction in 1971 and is 183m tall.

The Britannic Tower (AKA CityPoint) in the City was 122m tall when completed in 1969.

While it's not in the City of London, Centre Point, by the same architect as the NatWest Tower, Richard Seifert, is 117m and was completed in 1966.

The chimneys of Battersea Power Station are 113m tall and the first half of it was completed in 1935.

 

[teuchter]

I've been saying this for a long time on this forum but the pinnacle is truely stunning, far more aesthetically pleasing than The Shard IMO.

I reserve the right to change my mind once they are both complete, but nah. The pinnacle is just cheese really. So is the Shard, perhaps, but slightly more sophisticated cheese.

 

[FridgeMagnet]

I reserve the right to change my mind once they are both complete, but nah. The pinnacle is just cheese really. So is the Shard, perhaps, but slightly more sophisticated cheese.

I'm afraid that I have to agree; it's not embarrassing bulbous crap, but it's still twisty-turny crap.

 

[Diamond]

That is quite a dull building. The Chinese have set the standard with the CCTV building:

 

[Crispy]

Interestingly, the Pinnacle has the same diagonal bracing strategy as the CCTV building - only including it where its necessary as worked out in a computer simulation.

 

[cybertect]

Interestingly, the Pinnacle has the same diagonal bracing strategy as the CCTV building - only including it where its necessary as worked out in a computer simulation.

Same Structural Engineers on both projects - Arup.

 

[Crispy]

It was Cecil Balmond at Arup who helped invent the technique for CCTV, which they used again on Pinnacle. He's a good guy, that cecil - runs the Advanced Geometry Unit at Arup, they come up with all sorts of cool shit

 

[kyser_soze]

That is quite a dull building. The Chinese have set the standard with the CCTV building:

The old PWC building at No1 London Bridge used a similar effect about 15 years ago:

Taking a cube shape and knocking bits out of it isn't esecially innovative, even tho the CCTV building is pretty cool.

 

[Crispy]

Yeah, but cctv is over 50 stories tall, and the overhang is unsupported and overhangs by 50m. It's an engineering marvel.