Archivo: Top of the Shard 28 March 2014

Descripción: 28 March 2014. We found there were two viewing decks at the top of the Shard. The upper storey was partly open to fresh air above our heads and a lot cooler. But there was no way we could see to take photos except through the glass windows. Building of the Shard was completed in November 2012. It has 87 storeys and srands 306 metres (1,004 ft) high. The viewing decks were opened to the public in February 2013. _____________________________ Opinions about The Shard As the building rose higher and near completion it seemed to me that the range of opinions about the building became more polarised. "It Belongs to Our Imaginations" On 19 November 2011 an article by Dominic Bradbury in The Daily Telegraph gave the view of its architect Renzo Piano. He saw it as a tapering spire. "The spire concept is, something disappears into the clouds – it belongs to our imaginations", he says. "It's also about – and this may be a bit poetic – breathing fresh air. You don't go up only to show muscle. You can do that if you are stupid, but if you are not then you go up and look for fresh air to breathe. You cannot do that by taking possession of the sky with a big, aggressive building." Richard Rogers, Piano's friend and former business partner, was also quoted: "The Shard is an extremely important addition to the skyline" . . . 'It is a landmark. The skyline is changing very fast and now we have the Shard going up at exactly the right point." "Looking Down on Poverty" Others disagreed. Robert Booth in The Guardian on 30 November 2011, noted Renzo Piano's spire analogy. But the title of his article was: London's Shard: a 'tower of power and riches' looking down on poverty". Booth pointed out that the major investor in the building is Qatar. "Two of the apartments span two entire floors each and are expected to become London homes for members of the Qatari royal family. The Shard – 80% owned through the country's central bank – is now the jewel in the crown of the emirate's growing London estate," Booth quotes critics of the project. including Nick Stanton, former LibDem leader of the local Southwark Borough Council, who said: "There has been a failure of imagination". . . "There should be something in this building that the community uses on a daily basis instead of just walking around it. There should be something like a library in it … one of the frustrations I had as leader was the inability to link a big project like this to local outcomes." Professor Tony Travers, director of the Greater London Group at the London School of Economics was quoted in Booth's article, saying it is a "tower of power and riches" in a poor borough. "It points to the paradoxical nature of property development in cities such as London. In order to bring about transformation it is necessary to accept gentrification. It is inevitable the arrival of a sharp piece of global capitalism is an odd incursion into a borough that is still authentic old Victorian London." Booth reported Renzo Piano's disagreement. For him: "This is not about money". . .. "It is about surprise and joy. This is about the way cities should go. They should stop and we should not go beyond the green belt. If you do this by going vertical that sends a message about conserving land. The building is not about arrogance and power but about increasing the intensity of city life." My comment I thought about Richard Rogers comment about the Shard "going up at exactly the right point?". I guess this depends, as usual, on the age-old question "Who Benefits?". (Cui Bono). From the perspective of money - big money and smart money - the Shard may be in the right place. Whether or not it's at the right time for its investors will depend on the choices London makes - or are made for us by people with power. But a vital question for Londoners is whether our city becomes further divided geographically by race and class. Will it be even more a tale of three cities with a rich and expanding core, a well-to-do outer ring; and a poorer inner ring? _____________________________ More Links § In their Shard 1012 project Nick Wood and Hayes Davidson produced swooping, dramatic and sometimes glowing photos of The Shard. [amended 30 September 2018] The original link no longer works but here's one from Dezeen which did. § The issues raised by the supporters and critics of the Shard may offer useful lessons elsewhere in London. Especially as in poorer areas rebuilding and "regeneration" can be seen as part of the process of recovery - getting back to "normal" - after the riots in England in August 2011.   A more interesting question is the potential impact of development on the social issues underlying the riots and helping to prevent riots in the future. Sadly, in Tottenham where we live, it's beginning to look as though "Regeneration and Planning" will simply be repeating the same mistakes as before, while hoping for better outcomes. Foolish at the best of times. At a time of social breakdown, extreme stupidity. § Aerial view showing where I took this photo.m Dezeen which does. com , see the . www.dezeen.com/2011/01/28/shard-2010-exhibition-by-hayes-... § The issues raised by the supporters and critics of the Shard may offer useful lessons elsewhere in London. Especially as in poorer areas rebuilding and "regeneration" can be seen as part of the process of recovery - getting back to "normal" - after the riots in England in August 2011.   A more interesting question is the potential impact of development on the social issues underlying the riots and helping to prevent riots in the future. Sadly, in Tottenham where we live, it's beginning to look as though "Regeneration and Planning" will simply be repeating the same mistakes as before, while hoping for better outcomes. Foolish at the best of times. At a time of social breakdown, extreme stupidity. § Aerial view showing where I took this photo.
Título: Top of the Shard 28 March 2014
Créditos: https://www.flickr.com/photos/53921762@N00/14434798368/
Autor(a): Alan Stanton
Términos de Uso: Creative Commons Attribution-Share Alike 2.0
Licencia: CC BY-SA 2.0
Enlace de Licencia: https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/2.0
¿Se exige la atribución?: Sí