The Shard in London

Photo of The Shard in London, England
Photograph © Wayne Lorentz. Licensed to Artefaqs Corporation
Photo of The Shard in London, England
Photograph © Wayne Lorentz. Licensed to Artefaqs Corporation
  Scroll down for more pictures  
Photo of The Shard in London, England
Photograph © Wayne Lorentz. Licensed to Artefaqs Corporation
Photo of The Shard in London, England
Photograph © Wayne Lorentz. Licensed to Artefaqs Corporation
E-mail and Social Networking

Victorian Heritage, South East London, England.

Posted to the Flickr Pool by 64joe

Add your photos!

Royalty-free architecture stock photography

The Shard
Also known as:Shard Tower
Also known as:The Shard of Glass
Formerly:Shard London Bridge
Formerly:London Bridge Tower

32 London Bridge Street, London, England, Southwark SE1
Previous   Random   Next

Print this page   •   Share this page   •   Map This

Few large projects in London are built without controversy, and The Shard is no exception. Having Europe's tallest skyscraper in London wasn't the problem. It was just that many people didn't want to see it. Though Europe was a leader in creative architecture and skyline transformation in the late 20th century, by 2000 China had taken over that title, and the Europeans wanted skylines they felt were more classic, human, and traditionally European.

When it was first announced, plans called for a 1,200 foot tall £600,000,000 tower with 87 stories. The September 11th, 2001 terrorist attacks in New York and elsewhere led the designers to put together a new plan. This one called for a smaller tower with faster escape routes and greater stability.

In spite of the fact that it retained its graceful shape, it was labeled "the shard of glass" by those who believed the modern skyscraper would tear a cultural gash across the London skyline by hiding views of Saint Paul's Cathedral. English Heritage complained that the skyscraper would be visible from the Tower of London, and that it would visually overpower the cathedral as well. Those fears were at least partially allayed by the Commission for Architecture and the Build Environment which said the tower would become an icon for the city, and not cause harm to the visual fabric of London.

Unlike most skyscrapers that feature a steel frame on a concrete base, this one uses a steel frame on the lower office floors and a concrete frame for the upper hotel and residential floors. The steel allows for longer column-free spans in office areas. And the concrete helps with soundproofing living areas. Having weighty concrete up high also offers a greater measure of wind resistance.

The building is covered with what the designers call "extra white" glass, which reflects the sky more than most traditional skyscrapers. In effect, the upper levels almost disappear in certain weather conditions. Moreover, as the light changes from season to season, so too does the appearance of the tower.

Quick Facts
  • Floor space: 1,389,987 square feet
  • Office space: 576,784 square feet
  • Glass facade: 602,779 square feet *Weight: 18,000 tons.
  • Glass: 11,000 panes.
  • Roof height: 998 feet.
  • Elevators: 44
  • March, 2001: A planning application for this building was submitted to the London Borough of Southwark.
  • March, 2002: Both the Southward Borough and Ken Livingstone, then Mayor of London, gave their support to the project.
  • July, 2002: The Deputy Prime Minister put the planning application on hold so that a public inquiry could be launched into the impact the building would have on the city.
  • April, 2003: A public inquiry began into the construction of this building, allowing people to voice their concerns about its potential impact on the city.
  • November 19, 2003: The Office of the Deputy Prime Minister gave the developers planning permission, a key step in moving the building from drawing board to reality.
  • August, 2007: The Times of London reported that the building would be delayed at least a year because of financial difficulties.
  • April, 2008: The Southwark Towers were demolished to make way for this building.
  • February, 2009: Construction began.
  • March 16, 2009: Official date of construction start.
  • March 30, 2012: This building topped out.
  • July 5, 2012: Inauguration ceremonies were held for this building, though it would be many more months before it opened to the public.
  • May 6, 2014: The Shangri-La London opened in this building.
  • Developer: Sellar Property Group
  • Architecture firm: Renzo Piano Building Workshop
  • Architecture firm: Adamson Associates
  • Architect: Renzo Piano
  • Associate architecture firm: Adamson Associates
  • At the time of completion, this was the tallest building in Europe.
  • The building was designed with 39 elevators, 11 of them double-deckers.
  • The height of the observation level is 804 feet.
  • Because of the building's tapering shape, the floors are of different sizes. Office floors range from 31,379 to 14,456 square feet.
Stacking Diagram
Did You Know?
  • This was the site of Southwark Towers, built in 1976.
Green Things
  • The top of the building is a giant radiator to give off excess heat and reduce the need for traditional air conditioning.
  • English Heritage criticized the plan at the outset dismissing London Bridge Tower as "a shard of glass." The name stuck and was eventually adopted as the building' official name.
Rate This Skyscraper
method='post' action='/Building.php?ID=655#Rate'>Current rating:50% 80%  name='Rating' id='Rating' value='Praise' class='Plain'> name='Rating' id='Rating' value='Raze' class='Plain'>
Your Thoughts

There are 101 comments.

  people are forgetting this building wasn't built for Londoners or the British it was built for foreign investors on foreign money. They don't want it to look like a traditional London building that tourists flock to see because of its history. they want it to look like every other skyscraper in the world to attract the wealthy.

nikki j - Friday, April 3rd, 2015 @ 1:25pm  

  I have fallen in love - with a building. I cannot get it out of my mind, it is so magnificent, so elegant, so clever. And it suits London perfectly. Thank you.

Charlotte - Tuesday, August 5th, 2014 @ 12:23pm  

  What a wondrous structure this is with much internal work to be completed. I look forward to seeing the opening of the restaurant(s) to be opened on the floors 31-33.

Mike Higham - Friday, March 8th, 2013 @ 4:37pm  

  The Shard is so perfect for London. The historical side of London is enhanced by contrast with this stunning, modern beauty. Can't wait to visit!

Liz - Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 @ 8:38pm  

  It looks very impressive but you would not get me up there and I would not be too keen to get within falling distance should some nutter decide that he wanted to impress Allah!

Gordon Eden - Sunday, February 3rd, 2013 @ 9:01am  

  Looks good to me. The one critiscm I'd make, and it applies to all such buildings, Swiss-Re et al. They're all: look at me, each uping the ante on novelty, none really complement the environment in which they site, none do anything to complete or add to surrounding buildings. The area they're in starts to look like a junk yard, just a collection of unrelated shapes that look like some kid has randomly strewn an assortment of mis-shapes across the landscape.

Roger M - Wednesday, April 18th, 2012 @ 9:56am  

  Dull, dull, dull... I survey buildings old and new for problems, many via roped access, so have an unusual view of how these things work (or not). I was surveying a building next door to the Shard last week, and from close up it's uninspiring, where is the thought or invention? Mr Piano has hit a bum note this time. If they'd built it upside down, now that would have been something...

Stonetapper Baz - Sunday, February 12th, 2012 @ 3:23pm  

  The project is cool, the location is cool. I was pleasantly amazed when I saw it, for the first time, in July 2010. Without tall towers and/or skyscrapers a metropolis is just a huge, flat, decrepit, sad, village. London is, definitely, my preferred metropolis of whole Europe.

Moreno - Saturday, December 3rd, 2011 @ 12:56pm  

  All the one-star ratings must be the typical mind-numbingly conservative Brits. London needs to change and become more modern; the gherkin was a world of good and a modern icon, the Shard is the next step. An analogy is Jaguar cars: until recently they hadn't changed stylistically for decades and were losing money, now they are the epitome of modern and making massive profits. People need to let London adapt to the reality that it is the 21st, not 19th, century.However, it's position on the lower-rise South bank is slightly odd at the moment, but hopefully it may spark future development around it, because being a lone skyscraper it seems even bigger and more looming than it actually is, not helping to lighten the controversy about it's size!

James - Monday, September 19th, 2011 @ 9:01pm  

  I don't understand why people are so opposed to this building. As skyscrapers go, it really isn't a monstrosity as so many seem to think it is. It's quite a modest building when comparing it to the likes of others that are being constructed at this time across the world. It clearly isn't a building that's 'trying to be futuristic', it's a building of its time.It's much less intrusive than a building with a common square/rectangular shape (Canada One for instance). I think it looks incredible and is a much needed addition to London's skyline.

J Bacon - Friday, May 27th, 2011 @ 2:33pm  

  Just another architect, showing how clever he is, or how clever he thinks he is, more like, displaying his fallic symbol.It is really an insult to the skyline of London, and should be only in place in somewhere like the USA.

Paul Spinks - Saturday, April 16th, 2011 @ 7:30pm  

  In my opinion, It is very ugly and unsophisticated, and an insult to the skyline of London

Martin Roche - Friday, December 25th, 2009 @ 4:33am  

  Great looking tower for the world's greatest city!

andrew - Thursday, December 17th, 2009 @ 1:59pm  

  I think this building is going to be the best thing that has happened in London - "A true beacon of Light" I pass this site every morning and am amazed at it's progress. I have been taking pictures Im sure these will be priceless I am proud to be a Londoner..

Abel.De Souza - Saturday, December 12th, 2009 @ 4:15pm  

  People who are saying that this does not look right for London clearly don't know London very well. This is located in the financial district - where I work - and is appropriate for that area. All London high-rises are located in these business areas such as The City and Canary Wharf where they are in context of their environment. London is not a city like many of its smaller European neighbours that one smallish centralised 'city centre' - it is sprawling with many different areas. The West End for example - the more touristy traditional part of London (Knightsbridge, Buckingham Palace etc) - practically has no tall buildings and none in the City or Canary Wharf can be seen from there. This building is in keeping with the requirements and architecture of this primarily business area and I for one think its great that we can have a city that has amazing historical architecture in the most part but buildings such as this where appropriate in the business districts which, for people who clearly do not know London, are separate. There is no reason we cannot do both.

Matt - Friday, December 4th, 2009 @ 3:17pm  

  This is a fantastic building,and will start to rise above ground in the next couple of months.Those who oppose this oppose the future,evolution etc....and/or are jealous!

Jon - Sunday, October 11th, 2009 @ 11:08am  

  I think thi design is an extrodinary asset to the london skyline it will certainly bring london up to date with other major cities for once londons becoming modern BRILLIANT!

Tom - Monday, October 5th, 2009 @ 3:50pm  

  This will be a new symbol for London's Skyline. A Dynamic skyscraper for a futuristic city.

Brent Kampert - Tuesday, September 1st, 2009 @ 5:29pm  

  As someone who visits London only occasionally, I think it currently has one of the most amazing skylines. The mix of old and new is stunning and I think the Shard of Glass will be a spectacular addition.

Lynda Bullock - Sunday, August 9th, 2009 @ 10:10am  

  As someone who has worked on Borough High Road, next to such great attractions as London Bridge, Borough Market and the Theatre land alongside the river, one has to say that this is a complete nightmare and god knows how they got planning permission for it. The shadow that it casts across these historic places is horrendous and personally I would like to see this building axed.

Daniel - Tuesday, May 5th, 2009 @ 9:37am  

  This building boggles the mind. I love it. We need something similar in Tokyo.

Seiichi Mano - Wednesday, April 8th, 2009 @ 1:29pm  

  The tower looks amazaing and it is a shame more stunning towers have not sprung up in other parts of london - it is ridiculous to limit the height on skyscrapers - we should be leading the way = buildings like this provide a positive message to the world

Imraan - Thursday, March 19th, 2009 @ 7:49pm  

  Go for it London. I think it's fab! Just what we need and a few more as well to bring us in line with the other world class cities like New York. I love my Country but not it's politics and Government but they have got it right if they build this tower...definitely give my thumbs up to this sleek baby.

Suzanne Tomlinson - Wednesday, December 24th, 2008 @ 6:20pm  

  the structyure is ok, but why is it on the southbank, it looks abit odd just randomly placed, i think it should have some smaller, varied, skyscrapers around it otherwise it just looks ridiculous.

tom - Monday, November 10th, 2008 @ 11:49am  

  It is a mindblowing architect it just look wonder full i must say as we say in punjabi "chak te fatte"

himanshu - Sunday, September 14th, 2008 @ 9:58am  

  it'a lovely and a beauty full arcitect and it has alovely look

navi - Saturday, September 13th, 2008 @ 3:18am  

  Amazing! More skyscrapers like these are needed to evolve London's skyline and prove that we can do classic architecture as well as these modern wonders!Keep them coming! And keep making them taller! We're the financial capital of the world after all, LET'S SHOW IT!

Beth - Saturday, July 26th, 2008 @ 2:12pm  

  It is time to move on London needs such a building so the world will know that London has a modern side to it!

E.Erhuero - Friday, July 4th, 2008 @ 10:41am  

  London requires more 12/14 level groundscrapers. not a building such as the shard. this is London remember not a fancy foriegn city.

martin - Sunday, June 1st, 2008 @ 11:22am  

  I love this building. A 21st Century icon, which will be a wonderful landmark for London and even the UK. With 40 towers proposed, Approved or Under Construction in Canary Wharf, and about a dozen around the City of London underway or approved, London will be absolutely fantastic come 2012 and beyond!

David - Saturday, May 31st, 2008 @ 10:47am  

  London needs more high rise near transport hubs including lots of residential space. There are several other landmark buildings all being stalled for one reason or another. I must admit, this and the other buildings planned for City make Canary WHarf look a bit bland and unimaginative,all the best...

sivaraman.c - Monday, May 26th, 2008 @ 2:10am  

  London has great architecture from every era. I think it should have one for this era, for future generations to admire. There need more improvement.

Biswa Raj - Saturday, March 22nd, 2008 @ 4:42am  

  London is a famous international city.Its the 21 century london needs a proper skyline like american cities do filled with skyscrapers to make it much more exciting like New York

jamie rigby - Friday, March 14th, 2008 @ 9:18am  

  I do actually quite like this tower.. but it's not suited for London. We need to preserve and create traditional architecture, instead of further scarring London with 'futuristic' 'innovative'buildings. Haven't we learn from the 60s and 70s that basically all modern buildings are a mistake? Either build it in Canary Wharf, or not at all- CLASSICAL/TRADTIONAL architecture is the way!

Chris Walker - Thursday, March 13th, 2008 @ 4:40am  

  I love the design, and the idea of building a London Skyline. But a building should be an extension of its environment. So this building should be in Canary wharf. It would look fitting next to other tall skyscrapers, but it looks out of place on its own. But I do like the design, and I appreciate what they are trying to do. Perhaps we could get more buildings like this outside of London, in cities such as Leeds, Birmingham, and Manchester.

Joseph - Thursday, February 28th, 2008 @ 3:58pm  

  A really nice building. but look at the energy crisis in all of this. london is a great city with lots of history. we dont need another fantastic city turned into another new york or shanghai using tons of energy just to waste it. overall i like the building but i hope that we dont have to have lots of building like this in london because afterall london is extremely historic and deserves its rights to keep its most precious memories!

Jake - Thursday, January 17th, 2008 @ 5:27am  

  Oh my dear! The Gurkin is ugly already! London is a poor looking town and doesn't need more child like architecture. To bad England and London don't have more confidence in them self than these projects show.

Jesper Björnstedt-Qvarsell - Monday, December 31st, 2007 @ 9:18am  

  England doesn't need to look futuristic to attract the appreciation of others around the world. It is a nice building... but its just like every other skyscraper out there. The competition will never end and pretty soon cities will lose its unique attributes. This is not what England should strive for.

Luzia Santos - Tuesday, December 11th, 2007 @ 10:49am  

  an amazing idea defiantly going to attract more people to come to london

connor weller banks - Friday, December 7th, 2007 @ 7:27am  

  It an amazing peice of artwork and it is so beautiful at night when the lights hit it

tashia - Tuesday, December 4th, 2007 @ 10:38am  

  Think, it's not bad - much better then some dull 1950-70 blocks in the City and Southwark. If you really want to unblock the St Paul's, just clear the space between the cathedral and the river. Nothing to do with the powerful spire on the other side.

Mikhail - Monday, December 3rd, 2007 @ 10:05pm  

  am adeel from pakistan and this is your very beautifull tower and buldings i prayer for god.god bless your country tower bulldings and all people.

Muhammad adeel - Monday, November 12th, 2007 @ 11:06am  

  Really great building! But it would look better at City of London, not Southwark!

oksana - Sunday, October 28th, 2007 @ 3:58pm  

  from era to era london always will make great architects

Jake - Monday, August 27th, 2007 @ 10:35pm  

  I quite like this, at the moment London is lacking in tall structures/ skyscrapers and we have let the rest of the world surpass us! Its ashame it wasn't any taller!

JasonA - Wednesday, July 25th, 2007 @ 5:09pm  

  It looks ok if you were standing in an American city. Cities with tall buildings of glass and steel are just boring to me. Everyone just gets used to them and never, after a while stare at them in awe like the beautiful masterpieces London already has. London desrves better. This building in 50 years will look just like the nightmares the Architects of the 60's and 70's produced. Just awful.

Stephen Fletcher - Monday, July 23rd, 2007 @ 6:14am  

  it reminds me of what everyone in 1954 thought the future might look like... its an absolute outdated vision of the future.

Travis - Monday, June 25th, 2007 @ 8:09am  

  I think the design is brilliant and that there should be more buildings like this in London and other major cities

Wytze Wolthuizen - Friday, June 22nd, 2007 @ 6:04am  

  Good job London! This is the 21st century. London has always been one of world's greatest cities. It is important to keep up with the fast changing world. Great design. You should have kept the 87 floors.

kaisari - Thursday, May 24th, 2007 @ 10:22pm  

  whaoh!!!this is a great piece of architectural edifice from a out! this is amidst the best in 100years to come.thanks for thinking the unusual out for this generation and generations to come, to cherish and admire.

opeyemi ojo - Thursday, May 10th, 2007 @ 11:54am  

  This is an atrocious, hideous subversion of the London skyline. Building new things simply to look futuristic is a perverse way to impose ugliness in the name of progress. London does not need this montrosity.

Allen - Wednesday, May 9th, 2007 @ 2:30am  

  It's a shame it can't be a bit taller but everything else is spot on. People keep banging on about our heritage but isn't our future also our future heritage. Just hurry up and build it and more of the same please.

Michael Chambers - Monday, May 7th, 2007 @ 9:07am  

  Its about time London started building supertall structures like this. I think its much better looking than the gherkin.i love the angular lines but i think they could of done a much better job.

jake - Saturday, April 21st, 2007 @ 9:09am  

  the london bridge tower is a showcase for for progress in architecture and humanity. we all like progress in our lives and those who are against do not understand the need for improvements in the present way we live. The planning of the tower is ingenious and breathtaking and gives me confidence that humans can do the right thing to improve their quality of lives if do put on their thinking caps. I hope this tower is completed sooner than latter.

TEMITOPE - Sunday, April 8th, 2007 @ 11:39pm  

  The iconic images of new york, tokyo, sydney, chicago and now chinese cities and london looked dull - yes great vibe in the streets but as a statement it was low rise and dull. this is our generation and we need to mark our time on the planet with statements. Like many others - come-on lets create inspiring, soaring monuments to a great world city. It will be for future generations to demolish or keep as historic monumnets. i think it will be the latter and our city needs room - up is the only place

russell - Saturday, March 10th, 2007 @ 9:43am  

  I am very interested in skyscrapers and i often research the plans they have for London (the greatest city in the world) and thety have about 20 planned this one being the tallest of them. I think this is exctly what London needs, an amazing skyline. It's Brilliant!!

Adam Crawley - Saturday, February 17th, 2007 @ 3:15pm  

  This is an ugly monstrosity that decades that will undoubtedly become a scar on the face of London, and an eyesore to the British public along with Bishopsgate

jakob - Monday, February 12th, 2007 @ 1:37am  

  It looks futuristic, and beautiful. It;s more like the next generation tower, rather than today's structure.

Jamaica Miller - Monday, February 5th, 2007 @ 11:20pm  

  Love it. A great addition to a great city.

NickW - Monday, January 29th, 2007 @ 4:50pm  

  This is a perfect addition to the great city that is London! It will be an extra special icon for the 2012 olympic games. St Pauls cathedral? Pah.

James - Wednesday, December 20th, 2006 @ 11:58am  

  5 Stars. We need more building of the future but which work with people because they are after all meant for people.

Delvinos - Wednesday, December 20th, 2006 @ 9:40am  

  This will be a great asset to London. About time London created a building to capture everyone's eyes.Londoners and tourist. I can't wait when it's been built.So that i can go to the top and see the London beautiful skyline especially from such a height. I am sure it will be amazing.London it's time to reach to the HEAVENS.Huntley Scott

huntley scott - Sunday, December 17th, 2006 @ 12:10pm  

  A beautiful shard of glass for a gem of a city. Well done London!

LDN - Tuesday, November 28th, 2006 @ 10:22pm  

  Disheartened to see such a ugly, antipathetic shape. The style indictates an obsession with international capital, de-humanising and self congratulatory.Sad really.

Mich - Wednesday, November 22nd, 2006 @ 3:15pm  

  Its a monster,a greedy piece of speculative development that will damage Londons skyline for ever, completely out of scale and at odds with this cities unique character and its mixed low/mid rise street and square focused urban development.

J Attwood - Wednesday, November 1st, 2006 @ 5:54pm  

  Finally, a bit more modern design has been presented to Britain, this building along with the other great works of architecture among London will be one of the finest.

STROBE - Friday, September 22nd, 2006 @ 4:54am  

  like everyone else ABOUT TIME ok so our heritage is important but so is our future.if we dont build now london will have no future

andrew - Wednesday, September 20th, 2006 @ 2:28pm  

  At long last. If there are any people who want pointless little 10 story-or-less rectangles, go live in a shanty town or anywhere other than the Megalopolis of London. This city was the greatest of them all, but (in my opinion) it is now an international embarrassment that puts Great Britain to shame. Thankfully this and other buildings, including Canary Wharf and others on their way, may put London, and the country, back on the map that we ourselves drew up. But this is not enough, its just a beginning. These buildings belong in clusters and all tall buildings should be built together in The City or Canary Wharf. This is not Uganda, this is a G4 country and the second financial centre of the World. Well done Ken Livingstone.

An Enlightened Prince Charles - Tuesday, September 19th, 2006 @ 3:56pm  

  about bloody time:)i think most of london is still stuck between the victorian to 80s era.the future is now, and these new buildings that are going up just give you a uplifting feeling when you see them.remember,when st pauls was built (hi tec in its time)they said it was too large and blocked out a lot of things.BUT IT IS STILL HERE??

vince. - Monday, August 14th, 2006 @ 10:29pm  

  I cant believe how long it is taking to even start construction on this building, build it now! London needs density, to increase walking and decrease journey times. London needs more high rise near transport hubs including lots of residential space. There are several other landmark buildings all being stalled for one reason or another. I must admit, this and the other buildings planned for City make Canary WHarf look a bit bland and unimaginative.

mark - Tuesday, August 8th, 2006 @ 5:12am  

  love it! just love it! london needs more like it!

colin hopper - Wednesday, May 17th, 2006 @ 3:58pm  

  I think this building is fantastic. It would be better if it were a little taller but everything else about it is perfect.It is sleek and graceful and gives london the greatest city in the world (in my opinion)a new facelift.London has so much to offer but never had a good skyline,although canary wharf and all the new projects are fab.Now london can compete in the skyline competition.GO GO LONDON.

shannon frankling (male) - Saturday, May 13th, 2006 @ 3:04pm  

  A city is living breathing thing thats needs to grow or it will stagnate. This will be a sign to all that london is alive and vibrant. the design is fantastic and will be a wonderful addition to the london skyline

patrick guthrie - Tuesday, May 9th, 2006 @ 12:45pm  

  Britain must shed their international conservative image and move forward. London is one of the worlds foremost financial centres and it is time we began to show it. This building is the perfect vehicle to display London's wealth and international importance. BUILD IT NOW!

Geoff ashden - Saturday, April 8th, 2006 @ 5:49am  

  A modern icon for a beautiful historic city.

Brett Haase - Wednesday, March 29th, 2006 @ 7:12pm  

  Beautiful! I would love to see it in the future. The design is simple, clean, modern, yet complementary to the overall scheme of the city. Its time London took its place along with Shanghai and New York. It needs a distinct modern tower, a new look into the future.

Erratic Market Banger - Saturday, January 14th, 2006 @ 10:49pm  

  ***** Wonderful building and unique addition to the London that need to move forward without listening to those old thinkers who they want our city to stay behind all others.

S Plicio - Saturday, January 7th, 2006 @ 6:51am  


Rui Salgueiro Sousa - Wednesday, January 4th, 2006 @ 6:39pm  

  We dont need heritage, we need to move onto the future. How could a country try to lead the 21 century whilst keeping their old memories, and britain too much memories, that no needs anymore. Look at china they dont go on about history, all there stuff hitech gadgetry and all that sort of stuff. alright be proud and all that, i think all that needs to be kept in text books not in our faces any more.

Lee - Sunday, December 25th, 2005 @ 2:24pm  

  THIS IS RUBBISH. Why cant we give it a negative rate? When will they stop destroying London and its skyline? This is an anti-ecological, non-sustainable building. When the energy crisis will come, and it will come for sure, I hope someone oblige Ken Livingstone and Renzo Piano to climb by foot all the building stairs steps.

Antonio Maria Braga - Sunday, December 4th, 2005 @ 10:37am  

  A great idea..the design is one of great quality and architectural elements..and i admire renzo piano!!

Rita - Saturday, November 12th, 2005 @ 8:03am  

  at last,we have a modern wonderful building coming to the old smoke

william - Monday, October 31st, 2005 @ 6:26pm  

  finally a building to take us into the 21st century and out of the 20th. forget the past and invest in the future of london. when st pauls cathedral was built there was an outcry. they said it was to big and would dwarf all around it. but they lived with it, so why cant we live with what we are building today?.

vince - Sunday, October 16th, 2005 @ 9:52pm  

  What a brilliant tower!!!!!!!! Finally london can compete with the big boys. Its just typicall that nieve people are complaining about it.

sathesh alagappan - Friday, October 7th, 2005 @ 11:13am  

  georgeous,fascinating,sexy and superb piece of architecture

wilson - Monday, July 25th, 2005 @ 11:57pm  

  What a fantastic tower! Can't wait to hear more about the designs and see it when it is actually completed... HOPEFULLY! London is changing a great deal. I was in London about 7years ago... i mean canary wharf was nothing but one tower, and the city of London was quite unappealing! I visited London just 2 months ago and i was utterly amazed! Projects underway everywhere! New buildings completed and canary wharf looking fantastic, new, international and soo beautiful! I mean the Labour party cant be that bad, how London is looking the way it is today... astonishing! I hope to visit London more regularly! A spectacular city! Greatest in the world! I think skyscrapers are a symbol of wealth, prosperity, class and power! REACH FOR THE SKIES LONDON! :)

S. P - Thursday, May 26th, 2005 @ 8:32am  

  This is an excellent design. I think it will be a great asset to London. But, if it never gets built, we would be very happy to take this design and exchange it with the design for the "Freedom Tower" at the World Trade Center site!

Jason King - Friday, May 13th, 2005 @ 7:33am  

  I have no doubt whatsoever that this will be a fantastic addition to London's skyline.

Will Fox - Wednesday, May 4th, 2005 @ 10:29am  

  It brings us Architects so much pleasure when ground is gained in advancing our built environment...what catches me on this one is the buildings camouflage that embraces the skies..becoming a part of the mysterious.Lets gain towards the irregular and put new ides in the sky...

Wankumbu Sikombe - Friday, April 8th, 2005 @ 7:46am  

  London has great architecture from every era. I think it should have one for this era, for future generations to admire.

Graham - Saturday, March 26th, 2005 @ 7:44pm  

  it's so beautiful,this is modern building and a great architecture.

retno - Saturday, March 26th, 2005 @ 9:22am  

  What a fantastic idea! It will revive the centre of London - we are yet to have such a modern & iconic structure, which can be globally showcased, recognised and adored! This is our Sydney Opera House, our Empire State Building, our Sears Tower ... bring it on! London is already one of, if not THE most admired cities in the world and the 'Shard of Glass' can only add yet another 'weapon' to our armoury of beauty, status, pride and style - would our Great British Capital deserve any less? SO GET BUILDING!!

Tom Kinsley - Tuesday, March 1st, 2005 @ 12:29pm  

  This add a new dimension of excitement to London's architectural landscape. The design is graceful and tapers respectfully to dominate London's skyline. It's really beautiful. I think when completed, it will not only be tolerated but embraced.

kwabena Oppong-Peprah - Monday, February 21st, 2005 @ 1:41pm  

  Just what London needs. I love the new gherkin (Swiss Re tower). London as a whole is changing in it's opinion to modernity in all types of architecture. From galleries, museums and office towers. I think it's time to give Prince Charles the finger and tell him to shut up about his bloody hate for modern architecture. No one cares anymore! This tower should be built, if not for London, then to aggravate Charles and English Heritage.

Jamie - Thursday, February 3rd, 2005 @ 10:45am  

  I'm in the middle on the design of this building. I feel there is nothing wrong with the overall idea of building big, London is after all, a very special unique city. Cities like New York and Toronto are relatively new in the scheme of urban planning and building, therefor the opportunity for building tall (and often) is increased. Because London 's street grid derives from a varied historic past, a tall building may be a hinderance to pedestrian and vehicular travel. One thing I have always appreciated about European design is the opportunity to showcase modern edgy architecture surrounded by ancient lived buildings. This design is beautiful - too bad such a design couldnt be found for NYC.

Kevin - Sunday, December 26th, 2004 @ 11:37pm  

  Excellent!! It's about time London had something like this. It is well overdue. I love tall buildings and have been to both the USA & Canada. The skyscrapers over there are awe inspiring & when you come back to London (which is where I live), after seeing the huge skylines I think "hugh!". I know of 3 other tall buildings due to be built in the city & another at Canary Wharf but I feel we still need more of these types of buildings in London. If London is , as I am lead to believe, the financial capital of the world then why don't we have the skyscrapers to reflect that? All this hogwash about oh!, you won't be able to see St Pauls Catherdal etc. is complete and utter rubbish. This is now the 21st century, it's time to move on. Magnificent though St Pauls Cathedral is it will remain there forever and if pepople want to see it then they can as it will outlive all of us. St Pauls does not have to dominate the skyline forever. Wake up and smell the coffee.......London, oh how old and graceful you be - it's time to move on!! Eddie Merry

eddie merry - Friday, October 8th, 2004 @ 4:40am