Your are viewing a read-only archive of the old DiS boards. Please hit the Community button above to engage with the DiS !
the other 'skyscrapers' look tiny!
Got vertigo just watching that when he did the shot of the sheer drop
Me too. Just remembered going up the NatWest tower in a builder's lift when I was about 20 - what the HELL was I thinking of?!
Didn't look down, obvs.
if you dropped an M & M from the top of there.
but more chocolatey
of the highest measure.
It is three times higher than Canary Wharf! :o
So the architects and builders can have a wank over their own creation..?
OMG, I knew (had a feeling) it was an Australian who filmed that. And then he spoke. HA HA HA.
you could say the same thing about the pyramids etc. They have no point, they are just feats of human engineering
burial chambers for the pharaohs, symbolism for the descending rays of the sun, and as a representation of the primordial mound the egyptians thought the earth was created for.
a lot of these stupid buildings in Dubai are built by slaves (practically). The slums where these builders work are disgusting.
Oooh, a spinning building - wtf?
"The skyline of Dubai is powered by oil money, big ambitions, and architectural whimsy." architectural whimsy! he he
this makes me weep slightly:
"(due to the last 200m or so of the building not actually going to be inhabitable, it's merely there to make the building taller)"
It's not as if they have to worry about protecting any views in Dubai as it's just a flat plain of sand with no historical landmarks. And the sun is so high year round that shading isn't much of an issue (in fact you'd probably be thankful for some shade).
You have to admire the engineering but it is basically megarich people and companies showing off. Like boy racers with fat exhaust pipes and bodykits, but on a bigger scale!
and when you say town planning's unimaginative, town planners only generally work with what architects give them. your beef, i suspect, could well be with architects. but town planners are easier targets so hey, shoot away
that's why the country isn't littered with so much NEW semi-detached red brick housing developments etc
town planners yeah, they decide what uses they want in an area, but you can't very well refuse permission for something because the design's "not imaginative enough"
it will go to court and the court will say "no legal grounds for refusal", the council's decision will be overruled and it will get built.
besides, when councils are ALSO trying to ensure that a certain amount of affordable housing is built everywhere (again, government targets), and affordable housing meaning cheap, meaning probably worse design/less expensive design at least...you see how there's bucketloads of constraints? it gets you down if you let it
it's that councils want development in an area, and if you get known as a council that gets a bit arsey about design, they'll just go elsewhere. and to get all the councils in the country to agree on design standards? difficult. developers know what'll get them most money, that's all they want. i'm not judging them for that; it's a business.
also, the fact is that there's a fair few more traditional types in town planning, as in any industry or job ever (mostly) who don't go in for all this newfangled design.
either way, 200m on top of a building that's not used? not good, kids, not good.
and makes the building look more interesting than it would with a plain flat roof. In context 200m on that building will probably not look that big from ground level due to the perspective. And if the developers have any commercial sense the space will be used for communication dishes, weather monitoring equipment, TV/radio transmitters or something similar.