Main Edition
US
FR
December 15, 2024 - 8:00am
“An orgy of tall buildings will transform and arguably overwhelm London.” These prophetic words were written by the architect Eric Parry, in his 2015 book Context. They now read almost like an admission of guilt, given that Parry will soon be known as the designer of the joint-tallest building in London, and indeed western Europe. On Friday, the City of London’s planning committee approved Parry’s updated designs for 1 Undershaft, a skyscraper in the financial district that will draw level with the Shard at 309.6 metres. This is the maximum height permitted in London to avoid interference with air traffic.
In fairness to Parry, there is not much orgiastic about his building. Its shape is essentially that of four boxes stacked on top of each other, dutifully performing the basic function of a skyscraper: to maximise the floor space — and thus the returns to the developer — from a given piece of land. This sober profile (modest would be going too far) is the most striking thing about 1 Undershaft. It appears to signal the end of the playful skyscraper in London. Over the last 30 years, the city’s skyline has become littered with flamboyant shapes bearing familiar nicknames: the gherkin, the eye, the walkie-talkie, the electric razor, the cheese grater, the Shard. With Parry’s contribution, no such morphological metaphors spring to mind. It looks like something you might find in a data centre.
This is not the first indication that London’s tall buildings may be heading in a more conservative direction. A few years ago, mayor Sadiq Khan and then-housing secretary Michael Gove both rejected plans for the “Tulip,” a tower in the form of a glass bud atop a narrow stem. The reasons included environmental wastefulness — unlike 1 Undershaft, the Tulip did not provide a lot of office space for its height — as well as its outlandish appearance (the proposed shape was instantly compared to a sex toy). When Parry made the first designs for his new skyscraper a decade ago, the City of London reportedly insisted on a simple silhouette.
So maybe the relevant authorities have decided that London’s skyline has enough gimmicks. It doesn’t help that many of these tall structures are uncomfortably crammed together in the eastern part of the City, like overweight bankers in an elevator, so that their forms are barely identifiable in any case. More importantly though, the silly skyscrapers have already performed their role in the transformation of London. By providing a new topography of popular landmarks, they smoothed the process of destroying the city’s character and replacing it with a global real-estate market of anonymous glass and steel.
That process is now far advanced. The approval of 1 Undershaft comes just weeks after the City of London announced that Smithfield meat market, which has existed there for 900 years, will be closed. It is true that the planning committee also on Friday voted to protect the historic Bevis Marks Synagogue from an encroaching tower block, and for this it deserves credit. But the effort to brand 1 Undershaft as some sort of public space, with educational opportunities for “school children and local communities,” should fool no one.
The simple fact is, to quote from Parry’s own book again, “the vexed question of the city skyline and who determines it is ever present because tall buildings are inescapable.” His new tower may not draw attention to itself as ostentatiously as an earlier generation of skyscrapers, but it will stamp the power of his clients onto London’s horizon all the same.
Wessie du Toit writes about culture, design and ideas. His Substack is The Pathos of Things.
wessiedutoit
Join the discussion
Join like minded readers that support our journalism by becoming a paid subscriber
To join the discussion in the comments, become a paid subscriber.
Join like minded readers that support our journalism, read unlimited articles and enjoy other subscriber-only benefits.
SubscribeA very timely piece. Personally, I favour bunching the super-tall buildings together—the so called Eastern Cluster—because preferable to allowing scattered tall towers. Unfortunately, the Mayor Kahn is going for massive scatter right across London with little regard to sightlines, architecture or site, concerned only for the number of social housing units he can squeeze out of every development consent.
Of course the City’s clustering—originally justified by ensuring views of St Pauls and the Tower of London were unimpeded—has created a hellish monoculture of vicious downdraughts and soulless dystopian streets around Bishopsgate, without even the pavement level glitz of some Manhattan areas as relief.
But Wessie, you are wrong on one point. The City of London Corporation actually announced two weeks ago that Smithfield meat market would NOT move to Dagenham. After a declared cost to date of £308m on the move, relocation was said to be too expensive and the market is set to be extinguished, probably along with Billingsgate.
The City Coporation is a woefully undemocratic body. If you thought ‘Rotten Boroughs’ were abolished in England in 1832, think again. The City Coporation is now building its reputation as the ‘new butcher of Smithfield’. It is however very efficient at approving tall buildings and there are more in the pipeline.
The design of the thing from below the viewing platform is hideous.
I understand the need to build up instead of out. After all, England now has a population density of over 430 people per square kilometer. However, the least they can do is make these new buildings beautiful.
London has been sterilised by greed
Given that the official name of this is 1 Undershaft, shall we expect (or, rather, fear) that there will be 2, 3, etc. Undershafts built down the line?
Something like endless sequels, prequels, origin stories and remakes?
Hmmmm…
Or it might be the address of the building
As in 1, Undershaft St.? Doesn’t bring much comfort, I am afraid… 😉
It’s a really short street if that gives some comfort. Leadenhall building is next door and second tallest…