London Buildings, Good & Bad (Part 2)

London

So yesterday, a very potted history of how the developers arrived. Ultimately, the greedy inherited the earth. Step forward Julie and Magnus Davey, property developers and, by various press accounts I read, Grade A scumbags who have exploited government schemes and asylum seekers even as they knock down listed buildings.

It would be nice to think that the bottom feeders will get their come-uppance, but they won’t because they have powerful lawyers. However, UK stamp duty means that many owners of London’s overpriced FutureSlums™ are looking to offload and buy elsewhere. More than half of the city’s 1,900 ultra-luxury apartments built last year failed to sell, raising fears that the capital will be left with dozens of ghost towers. The high maintenance flats, complete with private gyms, swimming pools and screening rooms, are lying empty asLondon’s would-be first-time buyers struggle to find anything affordable.

240px-Central_St._Giles_Court_3But the clone buildings offering ‘exciting new business opportunities’ and ‘luxury loft lifestyles’ continue to rise, as we Londoners walk around them, trying to pretend they’re not there. Among the buildings I least love are Renzo Piano’s typically fake Central St Martin’s buildings, standard grey office blocks each with one jolly coloured wall, built around a miserable, windswept plaza full of chain cafes. The problem here is that it’s massively out of scale in a low-rise neighbourhood, dwarfing everything around it. This area, in my lifetime, was St Giles, a separate London neighbourhood hundreds of years old, with its own delightful character. No more.

Piano is also responsible for the Shard, of course, a trick building that’s actually another deeply ordinary office block given sloping sides and an empty turret to make it pay homage – in his words, not mine – to the city of churches. Inside there are some not very good restaurants that manage to be spacious yet weirdly claustrophobic, so that while you’re meant to be enjoying the insanely priced food you’re actually thinking about ‘Towering Inferno’. And the scale is vast, so vast that it wrecks the skyline from everywhere in the city.

If you think Piano has reached peak vulgarity, think again. His plan for the low-rise area of Paddington is the building on the right, which no amount of golden-hued photoshopping can make appealing. The architect has already had to cut over fifty floors from it. Thankfully the project has been put on hold pending a public enquiry. Piano is 80 years old. Perhaps it will be a very long enquiry.Paddington-cube_Renzo-Piano_Sellar_dezeen_936_3

Piano is far from being the worst superstar architect. Sitting in my study I’m looking out on a gigantic  mirrored building with a bulbous midriff on the south side of Blackfriars. It has apparently wandered out of China and ended up here.

Number 1 Poultry is a unique triangular site upon which there has been a graceful building longer than anywhere else in London. Its history is so extraordinary that one might think it was the centre of the entire city. So naturally it was demolished and remodelled a few years ago in a style I think of as ‘Miami Lego’, and is only famous as a popular suicide spot for stressed bankers. Clearly they’ve eaten in the rooftop restaurant.

The ‘Sainsbury flats’ of Camden have another fancier name, Sir Nicholas Grimshaw’s Grand Union apartments, but because they’re as ugly as a rabid mongrel and are built above a supermarket that’s not what everyone calls them. They change hands fast because they’re pokey and depressing and nobody in their right mind would want to live in them.

I could point out other horrors, like key-lining the whole of Covent Garden’s Long Acre with neon, and the Battersea development of millionaire glass sky-pools and dictators’ lofts – it’s Battersea, luv, not Monte Carlo! But the good news is that well-preserved good buildings still act as anchors to provide grace notes in cacophonous streets and remind you that every city needs to keep its own identity. Those who want to keep a city’s character are accused of nostalgism, but it isn’t that at all. Why do we flock to other cities? To remind ourselves about what makes people different and special in other places. History is not a dead thing to be looked back on but a key to understanding life. Of course we need new buildings, and as the South Bank and the Gherkin show, they can be quickly adopted and loved by their users. But balance is all, because once it’s gone it never returns.

For more about London’s lost neighbourhoods read ‘Vanished City’ by Tom Bolton.

12 comments on “London Buildings, Good & Bad (Part 2)”

  1. Ian Luck says:

    I don’t mind ‘The Gherkin’, but my favourite bit of it is the memorial to a Roman girl who was dug up when the site was being developed. That, to me, is more impressive than a huge glass dildo. The fact that the site was part of a city that teemed with life, from all over the world, a couple of thousand years ago, much as it does now.

  2. Jan says:

    The Gherkin is very close to the site of one of London’s famous medieval maypoles. The nearby church of St Andrews Undershaft is named as such as it was close to this maypole- now I suppose St Andrews could be so named as it is so close to the huge glass phallic symbol.
    (Ian you r awful but I like you!)

    Dunno how I managed to miss the memorial to the Roman lass but I did. Going to try and get over there to take some photographs of the last section of the Fleet as it approaches the Thames will pop over and look at the Gherkin and the shrine.

    The trouble with a lot of these massive structures is the wind tunnels they create around their bases. The open space around the Gherkin is very windy. The Ark in Hammersmith has had a dreadful effect on the terraced streets surrounding it.

    Something no one really factored in was that the dreadful fire at Grenfell Tower last summer revealed – how dangerous many cladding materials are. Many of the latest wave of towers have been clad with materials there are many doubts about. Removal costs for the substandard cladding materials may tip many of these structures over into the very bad investment category and destroy the international money box flat market.

  3. Brooke says:

    In addition to their ugliness, the wind tunnels they create and the dangerous materials used in their construction, these awful building sit on ageing infrastructure. In Philadelphia, developers receive municipal tax breaks in the range of $40-100M; consequently, the city does not have funds for services like trash removal or to upgrade infrastructure.

  4. Helen Martin says:

    There is one advantage to poor building practices and that is that the buildings will reach their “end of life” point much sooner than might have been expected and second chances may occur. Interesting that the White Tower was built in the 11th century and still stands comfortably but public buildings put up in the 1940s and 50s are now “old and decrepit” and need replacing.

  5. Denise Treadwell says:

    I don’t know why, developers think bigger is better! The tallest new building in San Francisco has developed cracks in its foundation, considering that they have charged over a million dollars per apartment, it’s a nightmare. They insist that the building is safe, although apparently it is listing. Haven’t they heard that we have earthquakes here?

  6. Helen Martin says:

    Denise, you can only hope that the residents of that building are drug lords and blackmailers when the earthquake destroys it and hopefully them.

  7. Helen Martin says:

    Oh, and the building’s architects and engineers and the city inspectors.

  8. Ian Luck says:

    Jan – The memorial is very simple and elegant. It has two inscriptions, in Latin, and English. It’s really quite touching in it’s simplicity.

    DIS MANIBVS
    PVELLA INCOGNITA
    LONDINIENSIS
    HIC SEPVLTA EST

    ‘To the spirits of the dead
    The unknown young girl
    From Roman London
    Lies buried here’

    A slab inscribed with a wreath is on the pavement in front of the memorial, and marks her grave.

  9. Jan says:

    That’s a nice thing Ian I have been inside the foyer of the Gherkin. Can’t believe I missed it. Don’t usually forget that sort of stuff

  10. Helen Martin says:

    I am astounded that the girl’s memorial is so simple and perfect.

  11. Ian Luck says:

    Obviously created by a sensible person who knows that the best things are usually the simplest and most tasteful. It’s a pity that more people in charge of projects haven’t ever realised that.

  12. Helen Martin says:

    Indeed. I would think the translation should read “… an unknown girl” though, shouldn’t it?

Comments are closed.