Mon 2 October

So Ken Livingstone, London's mayor, wants 20 skyscrapers in the middle of the capital by 2015, according to yesterday's Observer. Am I already becoming a reactionary but are 20 really necessary? Wouldn't it be better to have a few that are truly iconic and house the rest of the city's offices in (more efficient) groundscrapers. Tall buildings are more expensive to build and I'm not convinced of their sustainable qualities either. And clustering three or four new ones around the Swiss Re will obscure the view of that unique structure, which has so swiftly become an essential part of our skyline.

Source

QS News