Tulip Tower Cancelled

I actually kind of liked it. Why did he veto?

Why the fuck are Londoners letting corprates ruin their city?

Lol I shove that up my bfs ass every night

Are you sure it wasn't just a representation of the average thin Angloid dick?

Are all the tall buildings in London financed by Middle Easteners or something? The Shard is owned by Qatar

For an observation tower it looks alright but a tapering base would have looked so much better

C'mon, man. That thing? It looks like a dildo. That thing looks like a deel-doh.

Attached: vfdgfdgd.jpg (275x183, 5K)

Looks like a deformed cock, makes sense for London I guess

Why are skyscrapers in London so fucking ugly? I thought Brits had good taste.
I love contemporary architecture but new buildings in London and other UK cities are horrible: the dildo, the walkie talkie, the shard, Heron tower...

>Are all the tall buildings in London financed by Middle Easteners
London only survives because of russian and arab dirty money. A population consisting of fat, drunk football fans can not keep that city afloat

Arent most Sky Scrapers in London financed by Saudis?

NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

this is a sad day, i want more insane looking weirdo sci fi buildings in the world. you europeans are stuck in the past man. i would pay money to hang out in the top of that glass bulb over looking the city. would have been so rad. FUGG

Why does London have such ugly buildings? Seriously I remember clapping in the theater when that gay ass foot bridge in London got destroyed in Harry Potter.

They look like skyscrapers from all other parts of the world

good question, literally no where else in the UK is this shit present
I guess after the first few went up people just stopped caring

lmao youre an embarrassing person

>Seriously I remember clapping in the theater

Attached: 842200F1-12D9-45DC-B795-F6A0537C6D84.png (900x506, 464K)

Kek

Nah, the highest buildings in London look weird.
London is one of the world's capitals and they deserve better designs.

Attached: images (26).jpg (306x532, 34K)

>American clapping in the theatre
No surprises there

Lel I read that sunlight reflected off that building into the street and literally burned stuff since it was so strong where it focused

I hate most modern architecture, but I like how the Tulip was going to have those little pods on the side. I like the New York paper clip plan as well.

Attached: 3D560C59-F3EE-4628-B364-54CAB3A8FEBB.jpg (3000x1470, 438K)

pencil towers are cancerous ultracapitalist rot

The architect literally warned them about it but the company didnt care because they wanted to finish on time

It does

>I warned you about my own shitty design! This is your fault!

Skyline in London is fucked beyond repair.

Wish they'd focus on getting rid of the arab/ruski/chinese money and build some affordable housing.

Let's turn back the clock a bit and check out some timeless London architecture

Attached: 102 pett france.jpg (800x1200, 176K)

London has always been disgusting.

At least you could romanticize the Victorian-era buildings by the river and the thick, foggy nights. There's no romanticizing what you have left.

SHIT, maybe tulip island next time?

Attached: Tulpeiland_voor_de_kust.jpg (810x440, 144K)

It's not ugly, but I'm somewhat sick of those modern futuristic throw-away architectures.
I know it's unrealistic because of money, but I'd like to see some new buildings that are are radiating a truly universal glory. You know, something that represents a higher ideal with such overwhelming beauty and grace that it makes you want to be a better person. And I don't necessary mean a religious theme like in pic related, although it would be all the better IMO.

Attached: download (2).jpg (1280x853, 1.9M)

The Millennium Bridge? I thought that bridge was rather nice actually

Money isn’t an issue. They could easily build this if they wanted to,

because london has always been the haven of corporates you idiot

JF'S positively seething

Attached: ertjujy.png (1366x768, 2.01M)

Based and chad warden pilled

>They could easily build this if they wanted to

They absolutely could but there is a concerted effort to detach wypipo from their history

I have doubts that level of craftmanship is possible anymore. There simply aren't any craftsmen around. An artist could design something like that but building it is entirely different. There's an incredible amount of skill that went into classical art and architecture that has been replaced by machines.

I don't get what criteria they go off. Tulip would've been no uglier than any of the other hideous post-modern abominations they've littered London with in recent years, and at least it would've been interesting to look at.

The Shard looks pretty good imo

>Why does London have such ugly buildings?
This was unironically vetoed for being too ugly. They were concerned it would ruin London's skyline.

Attached: 1545709061694.jpg (200x200, 4K)

He did the right thing. It looks awful.

>They were concerned it would ruin London's skyline.
*ahem*

Attached: 20-fenchurch_daniel-harrison1.jpg (531x800, 99K)

Just 3D print it d00d

I thought Tulips was a Dutch thing. Do the English ever have any original ideas?

You're only seeing what you want to see

i found myself walking below this building and got sick looking up at it. something with it's dimensions and angles fucks with your head and stomach

It's okay but in my opinion buildings in Canary Wharf look better.

Attached: images (30).jpg (678x452, 60K)

I unironically love modern architecture and clean geometric shapes, but that thing was so fucking ugly. Glad it was cancelled.

Attached: londres.jpg (1500x844, 333K)

It's just ugly

People meme about 'le London skyline' but it's really not that bad. Not great either, but not bad, though there are a few exceptions like this piece of shit

It reminds me of a plant like a flower before it has blossomed.

London has always been a constantly evolving city.

Something similar happened here
playbill.com/article/gehrys-disney-hall-may-be-sandblasted-to-reduce-glare

>I thought Brits had good taste.
How on earth did you ever experience anything that led you to that conclusion

just make modern buildings with a victorian facade. not that hard. it's infinitely better than that literal sperm building the OP posted

>mfw an american claps

Good riddance, but it's not enough, The City in London needs to be demolished. Whenever people think of London they don't think in the Gherkin, the City, the Shart, they think of Buckingham Palace, the Parliament building, St Paul's Cathedral, Borough Market, the Thames river, the tower of London, etc. All those skyscrapers are completely out of place there, they are just a bad attempt by ego driven architects to turn London into New York.

Canary Wharf is actually pretty nice though.

Is London trying to go for the "soulless" look because they are definitely succeeded at it if they are.

Attached: london foot bridge.jpg (660x440, 115K)

All the skyscrapers there are bland and uninteresting shite.

London doesn't exist solely for tourists.

Have you ever actually been there?

The Argentinians did it and to be honest it looks pretty fucking ugly

Attached: fotoGrande1.jpg (500x426, 58K)

London is lost in an identity crisis. It desperately wants to be seen as a modern global city, but the architectural demands required to assert that just don't really fit with its historical character, which is why it's ugly af now.

>London is lost in an identity crisis.
All of Europe since WWII is

Have I been to Canary Wharf? Yes I have, and all the skyscrapers there are bland, dull, uninspired, boring dross devoid of character and imagination.

Dunno. Is Budapest or Vienna?