The Shard Opening

dacouch

Errata wrote: »

I pity anyone who lives a 10 minute walk away, it's a monstrosity.

It's a beautiful building, the majority of people who see it would also agree. Obviously people have different tastes so not everyone will like it

Gavin83

Dave_C wrote: »

This is really splitting hairs over definitions. In this case size matters.:)

Emley Moor is a free-standing concrete structure and it and is 20m taller than the Shard.

I think it's more a case of the Shard being the tallest because they say so.

They're not similar in the slightest. The engineering skills required to construct an inhabited building are so much greater than a freestanding structure such as a tower. There is a reason there are separate categories for the structures, to represent the architectural differences. So therefore The Shard is the tallest building as stated.

Not to take away from Emley Moor at all, it's still an impressive structure but they shouldn't be compared.

Also The Shard is beautiful, even more so in person.

Dave_C_2

Gavin83 wrote: »

There is a reason there are separate categories for the structures, to represent the architectural differences. So therefore The Shard is the tallest building as stated.

Exactly my point, "they" are saying that the shard is the "tallest building". If they said that the shard is the "tallest inhabited building" I don't have a problem with that.

As I said, splitting hairs over the definition of "building"

ETA:
I forgot to add the smiley at the end. Please don't take this too seriously.

The OED defines a building as "a structure with a roof and walls, such as a house or factory." which applies equally badly to both :-)

I've just found this in "Have I Got News For You" style Skyscraper News

I can't help but wonder which would be taller if they were swapped geographically. :-)

Dave

Errata

If a building must have a roof, then the shard isn't a building.

barbiedoll

I'm not sure that the Shard would even qualify as an "inhabited building", they're apparently having trouble finding tenants to fill the office space and they haven't even begun to fit out the apartments yet, so they won't be occupied for a while.

I registered to apply for tickets to the viewing platform when it opens in Feb 2013. They want to charge £25 for half an hour of riding in a fast lift and looking out of a very high window! :eek:

I shall instead, go to the top of Guys Tower and look out of their windows for free! Much more MSE

dacouch

barbiedoll wrote: »

I'm not sure that the Shard would even qualify as an "inhabited building", they're apparently having trouble finding tenants to fill the office space and they haven't even begun to fit out the apartments yet, so they won't be occupied for a while.

I registered to apply for tickets to the viewing platform when it opens in Feb 2013. They want to charge £25 for half an hour of riding in a fast lift and looking out of a very high window! :eek:

I shall instead, go to the top of Guys Tower and look out of their windows for free! Much more MSE

The high end apartments eg the £50m plus apartments will sell quite easily.

Errata

They may sell easily, that doesn't mean they'll be occupied. I think most of the 1 Hyde Park flats that have been sold are unoccupied. They're bought as an investment, not a dwelling.

dacouch

Errata wrote: »

They may sell easily, that doesn't mean they'll be occupied. I think most of the 1 Hyde Park flats that have been sold are unoccupied. They're bought as an investment, not a dwelling.

I'm pretty familar with 1 Hyde Park and Knightsbridge Appartments, they are typically owned by the super rich as a London base / for the London vacations. These type of value appartments anywhere in the world are typically one of a number of properties the super rich own which they travel between.

Any property in this price range is normally an investment as they have their own inflation due to the desirability of the locations

One car park space in Knightsbridge Appartments is £150k per year...

PinkLipgloss

We’ve seen from your comments this morning that there was some disappointment with last night’s laser show. We are really sorry if you did not enjoy a positive view of the light show from where you were watching. The laser show was to celebrate the inauguration of a wonderful building, however the overall impact of the laser show was affected by a few factors last night, including a particularly bright sky. We hope it won’t diminish your enjoyment of The Shard itself, and we have been overwhelmed by the amount of support we had throughout yesterday’s inauguration and would like to thank you all.

:rotfl::rotfl::rotfl:

Abbafan1972

The website in the original post has been removed!