mdr j ai lu le commentaire avec un accent dans ma tête 🤣

Haha 😅

Tu parles très bien anglais je trouve. Super vidéo !

Ça va par rapport à moi par exemple mdr

@@percyjackson8428 Merci Quentin, c'est adorable !!

Yes, by the way we're starting to call it the "European Manhattan".

This is very true, every time I go there, there are new skyscrapers dotted around the city. I personally love it.

@@Looking4En no, Manhattan is the the American central London

@@drewkavi6327 you mean the city of london ?

Honestly… Frankfurt has always been dominating the skyline game in Europe. It will never change. Especially with the "Four Frankfurt" and Millennium Tower projects.

Thanks, I made the correction.

I agree with everything you say as a Londoner born and bred in London’s old East end, in Bethnal Green. I have no problem with the changes because London has to change to remain relevant in the modern world but what I don’t agree with is displacing Londoners born in places like Bethnal Green, forcing them to move out of the area because they can no longer afford to live there, especially when those people have lived in the old east end for generations. That for me is social engineering and changing the face of London without consent of the people that lived there before.

I am Hoxton born & bred. Last of my family still living in the area since they first arrived in 1931. We were subjected to social genocide. Communities destroyed and historic family ties torn apart in the name of Diversity and Multiculturalism without our consent while the rest of the country looked on feeling safe the immigrants were not being housed near them. That is why I smirk seeing the rural area's squealing like stuck pigs they are getting some of what London has been getting for over 80yrs. I started as a butcher's apprentice in Dalston, after mum found out I was working in Charlie Wrights stripper's pub Pitfield St. Micky Flannagan in my years at school & Michael Watson the boxer in my class in primary & secondary school. I had a shop along Hoxton mkt/Chaple St & Roam Rd for a while. So many " wild " memories, but if a blind beggar could see the changes being made in London's social structure & population over 30yrs ago, it leaves you with the conclusion the was/is a long term plan in play.... Of what ? No idea, except the eradication of the indigenous population by mass uncontrolled immigration. @@lg5819

Yes, that's true...

In theory any increase in supply of housing will depress the market. For instance, you build a block of expensive apartments in docklands. Sure, only the well to do can afford to live there. But those residents have moved or not bought in other areas. It will theoretically put a downward pressure on those areas. In reality this does seem to be playing out because house prices in central London, and rents don't seem to have risen much in five years or more. Even in some Outlying parts of London rents are rising a bit, but by less than inflation.

@Sabrina Belladonna That doesn't make any sense. The value of a property comes from people living in it.

If skyscrapers resulted in double the housing units then, ceteris paribus, prices would fall.

@@MrBlaxjax Maybe prices are going up because the demand is going up quicker than the supply. Or maybe it's just the damn interest rates transferring money from the haves to the have nots.

You missed out Birmingham also

@@genoshajames Birmingham's skyline is so fucking shit man. I live in the WORST FUCKING CITY IN ALL OF THE MIDLANDS!

Manchester is a fantastic city. I spent a weekend there in early April and I could barely believe how it had transformed itself. So easy to get around too with the tram network.

Soon all UK cities will be flooded with skyscrapers

Agreed!

Most of the historical buildings have protected status so they can't usually pull them down to build modern buildings.

@@seansmith445 That isn't what he meant, he means that the skyline is protected. So you can't build buildings that effect it drastically

Ya preserving this ‘history’ is the reason most of europe has no tall buildings. New York, is what it is cuz were focused on progression not preservation. Everyone wants to live here not in some shyt pile 40000 year old sarcophagus that smells like cat piss and have closet sized rooms. Skyscrapers are the best thing to lower prices AND take your city into the future compare all of Europe to china and tell me who have better cities

@@alimeharaz3674 clearly europe does. china’s cities almost only contain high density housing but half of chinas skyscrapers lie empty. the apartments they have for middle to lower class people are smaller than any London or Parisian accommodation, eg Hong Kong apartments. china and the US also both have monotonous feels to their city, a ‘copy and paste’ style with their cities sprawling further than the eye can see, while in their CBD’s, light doesn’t even shine down into the street due to the skyscrapers. houses in historical areas, eg Mayfair in London, cost much more to live in than almost any skyscraper. there’s a reason why tourists love Europe due to the culture which was and is defined by history. oh and bear in mind, while NYC has a ratdemic, London’s streets are practically pristine.

That's true but compared to other cities in Europe, it's the city that has the most !

London has extremely tough height restrictions due to its close proximity to London City Airport, the CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) may often limit a buildings height or reduce it as the skyscraper application gets submitted so it doesn’t interfere with flight paths from the airport. London is also built on clay. Hence why most newer skyscrapers built in London are between 150m-250m (metres) in height . It’s incredibly unlikely London will see another super tall (300m+) or ever a mega tall (600m+) skyscraper (like those going up in Shanghai, Hong Kong or Dubai). The Shard at an incredible height of 310m and 72 floors will likely remain the tallest building in the London and likely one of the tallest in Europe for decades to come.

Thank you for sharing these informations, it's very interesting !

Yes, but when this is destroying culture and incredible buildings to put in place a monotonous and sometimes ugly skyscraper, this is not needed or wanted

If skyscrapers signify the future to you then you're welcome to it. I see better quality building at a more human level the way forward. If you're looking for the gold standard for cities then look no further than the Netherlands. Amsterdam, Rotterdam are shining examples of how to organise a densely population urban area. You want to encourage people to engage with the area they live in not drive them away. Look at how people gladly escape from places with tall buildings. They're alien, they don't encourage interaction, i.e. shops, cafes, restaurants, hardware, opticians etc, etc where people want to hang out. Just look at the most desirable areas to live in where you live, that's the clue to the future. Lots of green spaces, allotments, friendly neighbours, engagement with people around you. Not being stuck in a room looking at a screen all day and being trolled by people you don't know or care about. I know which I prefer

I totally agree with you but unfortunately it’s extremely unlikely. As I said earlier on another comment - “London has extremely tough height restrictions due to its close proximity to London City Airport, the CAA (Civil Aviation Authority) may often limit a buildings height or reduce it as the skyscraper application gets submitted so it doesn’t interfere with flight paths from the airport. London is also built on clay. Hence why most newer skyscrapers built in London are between 150m-250m (metres) in height . It’s incredibly unlikely London will see another super tall (300m+) or ever a mega tall (600m+) skyscraper (like those going up in Shanghai, Hong Kong or Dubai). The Shard at an incredible height of 310m and 72 floors will likely remain the tallest building in London and likely one of the tallest in Europe for decades to come.” Skyscrapers will continue to go up in London and the surrounding areas, just nothing taller The Shard. Personally I’m expecting Manchester in the next few decades to reclaim the title of having the tallest building in the UK.

@@harrydunning4275 i feel like if a super tall tower is to be created in London, it would most likely be in Stratford or the South Bank of the River Thames

Yes I agree with you

That's true!

I think you're right.

Canary warf cluster is pretty much full, the surrounding area will also be swallowed in the next 5-10 years. The cluster in the city is also full, there is no more space left for any more skyscrapers there

@@asfand5747 yeah there is, just knock down small neighbouring buildings

@@nightowl3218 not so simple mate

I disagree. What's the purpose of these huge buildings, Vanity? Ego? I don't want the London I know & love to be reduced to corridors that encourage more extreme weather. A gentle breeze at present is a lovely thing on a warm day. The same breeze funnelled between skyscrapers becomes a lot stronger and less effective

Merci infiniment !! J'y prends beaucoup de plaisir donc cela devrait aller !

@A.L Keep in mind that all of those other cities aren't sitting static though. Toronto for example is booming with skyscrapers going up. Even here in Chicago there are plenty of cranes on the sky line. Here in Chicago we already have 9 buildings approved or under construction that will all be 750 ft tall or higher in just the next 2 years. New York is booming too. Especially with residential buildings. So London won't likely move up the ranks as fast as your thinking. I think it will rise up the list. But much more slowly.

London doesn't need skyscrapers to be impressive!

Though it is true that many of these buildings are mid rises. There will still be many many new skyscrapers. At the moment there are 30 buildings, greater than 492 ft/ 150 m. However there are 11 more under construction, which you see topping out everywhere. There are also so many new ones planned, that by 2030 we should have a total of 80 skyscrapers. Plus a few hundred mid rise buildings, will be added to the skyline. Of course, many new ones are also approved every year. So 80 skyscrapers, will likely be the minimum amount. For comparison Chicago has 132. Since it has taken 100 years to build that many and Chicago is not experiencing, anywhere near the same, population pressures and land prices. I would say that it is very likely, that London will catch up with Chicago. However I can't see it ever catching up with New York, that has about 300 skyscrapers and counting. I also can't see developers, ever building super tall buildings, like a few of the ones in New York either. This transformation is nowhere near as impressive, as what has occurred in Chinese cities though. Shenzen has gone from zero to 343 skyscrapers in about 30 years.

@@Joeblogs263 Crazy! If you put the London Shard in Chicago, it would only be the 6th tallest building in the city. Though by highest occupied floor a little lower than that since it's top floor can only get people up to 801 ft. The Shard would be the 10th tallest in Chicago by how high up it can get people. Crazy fun fact sheets. 🙂 Keep in mind though Chicago has new buildings going up as we speak. And most of Chicago's sky scrappers did come after 1970. And many more are proposed. The skyscrapers that are also going up are significantly larger in both square footage and by height as well compared to London. Chicago's John Hancock Center for example has more than double the floor area of the Shard. (While also having a top floor over 1,100 ft.) Chicago's current growth also hasn't stalled. It's out skirts of downtown is actually the fastest growing area. Right now over 30 high rises are going up as we speak. (Many 17 story or 25 story caliber buildings.) Plus all of these plans were put in place before the current economic crisis and the war in Ukraine. So I wouldn't bank on London or any city for that matter, growing as was predicted. As far as New York, it's growing even faster than Chicago in skyscrapers. Yeah, I don't see London catching up there. With Chicago maybe a long shot. 🤔 (Though Chicago's buildings would still be taller and larger on average.) Only time will tell though. I'm not counting London out. It's the only real major city the UK has after all for skyscrapers. Where as the US here has a New York, Chicago, LA, Huston, Seattle, Detroit, Milwaukee, San Francisco, Twin Cities etc... all with major skyscrapers. So skyscraper demand is more spread out across the US rather then being all concentrated in one specific city like in the UK. London will probably continue to be known for more of its historical buildings however either way. 😉

@ian VIII Um...have you ever been to Chicago? It's utterly massive! The metro area spans 9,581 sq, miles. London's metro area is 3,236 sq, miles just for comparison. Chicago's metro area is full of incredible restaurants, museums, theaters, shopping, amusement parks, resorts, parks, you name it. There is an insane amount of things to do in Chicago. That's why it has the 2nd highest visitors rate in the US. It's only 2nd in tourism to New York for visitors. Chicago and the surrounding area is so freaking huge. Like I said it covers an area that's even bigger in area than London. London has a higher population due to housing. But Chicago still has over 9 million living in the metro area. And I never said it was an actual competition. 🙂

I think it's because docklands land was originally derelict and therefore inexpensive. The whole docklands project was speculative in the 'will it work/won't it work' sense, so the pressure was on just to develop the area, and mostly, low rise was entirely suitable. Fast forward 30 years and with the success of docklands it would make better use of the land to put in more high rise, and there will be more.

@@MrBlaxjax what you said makes sense entirely , and its now very expensive real estate, i wish i had owned a bit of it back in the day

There are height restrictions in the docklands of new builds going up because of the planes flying into city airport

Most of the low rise buildings in the docklands area were built in the late 80s and early 90s. Up until the year 2000 the area wasn't deemed as particularly viable until the 2 new skyscrapers were built next to 1 canada Square. Over time more and more money/investment poured in until you get what is there today. Over the next few decades I can imagine a lot of those low rise properties being demolished and built on. For over 10 years the only skyscraper in docklands was 1 Canada Square.

Mumbai will pass Shenzhen soon, they're building fast: over 250 buildings over 150m under construction.

It has been over critical planning departments that has stopped new high rise buildings going up in London, for many many years. Considering the very first multi level metal framed building was built in England, it shows just how these historical protectionist planners have set back London from the rest of the World. When great metal beamed building projects such as the tower bridge & Parliament were so advanced for their time, its a shame London wasn't allowed to build upwards from those early times.

I agree, this is a major issue in construction that is still too often neglected.

yep, plus england isn't really known for having a good weather in general

that's a good thing, the berfect blend between new and old

Not really, London has fantastic modern skyscrapers, not like any others

I agree, so sad.

Not really londons skyscrapers are different shapes

It’s much harder to build high in London than NYC due to the city being built on a mostly clay soil base rather than rock so much deeper foundations are needed

but as you know,london just have a few tall building,I think London or UK should have more tall building,because London is a city, it just have a few tall building and it doesn't look like hk(my home),or USA, new york, if London add more tall building,it is look like better.And you should to know,uk is a island,but it is so big too!uk have a lot of good place,you can live in another place!not just London!

@@insectschannel8132 i agree with the bad grammer guy

What are you talking about????

What job do you do

no

just because u can't afford it doesn't mean they shouldn't build these these will improve the economy your idea will worsen it

not enough space in london. and if you can not afford those high rise, you can’t afford low rise either, not in london!

@@australianpatriot lol

Totally agree. I love Tokyo but London is racing ahead of it now. London is a modern miracle.

Great idea !

Merci Bruno !! 😀

Thank you very much!

We need to get back to having good quality social housing that ordinary people can afford. When there's a home for everyone regardless of income then we can pat ourselves on the back.

@@mypointofview1111 yeah, that's the thing. It eventually turns homeless people into scammers and makes London a very dangerous place.

Merci beaucoup, c’est très gentil ☺️ Vous avez choisi quelle région de France ?

@@Looking4En La Nouvelle Acquitaine, très loin de Londres (de plusieurs façons) 🙂 . Mon conjoint est français.

@@suppleberry3863 Belle région ! J’habite Bordeaux 😊

@@Looking4En Quelle belle ville ! Moi, près de Niort dans les Deux Sèvres.

@@suppleberry3863 oui en effet ! Ah oui je connais un peu , la région est pas mal non plus !

Thank you so much !

Thank you a lot !

Merci ! En plus ça fait pratiquer :)

Yes, this is the dilemma.

@@Looking4En I choose letting people see the SKYLINE

I didn’t believe it at first until I went. Have you been to London recently they are building high rises and even skyscrapers in loads of different parts of the city

I agree with you, I think that not concentrating skyscrapers in specific places is a mistake

Build a Manhattan...🙄

I agree london has many busy airports

I'm glad you like the channel!

I really like the supertall buildings in Moscow, especially the Evolution Tower and Vostok !

How can you build affordable housing in London when land is so expensive, more people are enjoying living in tall buildings these days unlike they did in the past so the future is up up up ............

​@@davidsivills3599 the more expensive the land is, the less viable a skyscraper is, as they are a poor use of land. They require open space around them which leaves that expensive land permanently unused. If you want high density, you're looking at 6-12 storeys. However around the docklands there is naturally open space in the form of the river, so I'm sure they'll build lots more around there, but due to cost of maintenance and build, they will *never* be affordable and will get more and more expensive over time. skyscrapers were a 1960s vision of the future, they are now outdated and passé.

Only about 10% of land in England is built on. What are you on about? 😂

I understand and I want to apologize for the incompleteness of this video. It was not the way I chose here. However, I really like skyscrapers, just watch the other videos on my channel, especially the one on the Bishopsgate tower in London. I think you will enjoy it !

Building no more high rise buildings which means less jobs in the future even though its expanding and will lose its tourism in the future, yeah a 'better job'

@@luqiiiii Those jobs can easily be somewhere else. Given the WFH trend not everything has to be centralised in London. Germans for example distributed investment among their cities much more fairly and that’s one of the reasons they are doing much better than the UK. A city can expand only to a certain point until it implodes and turns into a concrete jungle wasteland where everybody is utterly miserable.

where exactly @@ramochai

@@luqiiiii Midlands. What’s happening in Manchester right now looks promising, and hopefully will take weight off London’s shoulders. In spite of all the naysayers.

That being said, attempting to resuscitate the economy by selling real estate to foreign buyers is a recipe for disaster. So many examples all around the world.

Thank you so much, I am very happy to read your comment !! What did you think of my English ? Is it pleasant to listen to?

@@Looking4En Yes we like french accents...it sounds so french 🥖🧑‍🍳🎭🗼🇲🇫

@@rob8530 Great ! Thanks 😊

Merci, ça fait plaisir !!

Thanks for your comment, I will delate subtitles !

London looked definitely much better before. I find the fetishization of skyscrapers rather juvenile.

Merci. Je suis ravi de l'apprendre !

You talk about the walkie talkie ? (for exemple)

@@Looking4En And many more. Including the Shard. 😐

My pleasure

Thank you a lot !

The Panama canal recently celebrated 100 years. Sea levels either side of it have increased exactly ZERO in that time. There's climate "science" then there's climate evidence. Australia and the USA have recorded colder than normal summers and winters recently.

Merci beaucoup !

thats a long way away