I have been thinking about the protected views around London and whilst I understand St Paul's should be a protected view from a distance, it seams the Fleet Street protected view that the Cheesegrater seeks to protect, is not in between the view and St Paul's. I came to the conclusion that it must be the sky view around St Paul's that's protected as this is the only logical reason, unless I am missing something? I highlighted in green what it could have looked like, would it really be that much of an eye sore?

by SetTheDate

6 comments
  1. You are correct, the angle ensures that the dome remains framed by clear sky.

  2. The Cheesegrater is hideous so, no, it shouldn’t intrude on the sight lines for one of the most famous cathedrals in the world.

    I wish the councils gave as much of a shit about sightlines around Battersea Power Station instead of shilling to private developers who’ve built giant, mostly unoccupied, overpriced mansion flats without any architectural or cultural merit around another iconic London building.

  3. My employer was once unable to take a lease in Bishopsgate because we needed two extra aircon units for the floor (due to a 40 person training room exceeding occupancy limits) and there was only one spare slot on the roof. So we needed to stick one in a window, but it would be visible from the Monument.

    City of London says no.

  4. There is a similar angled tower proposed behind the Cheesegrater in this view, 100 Leadenhall, that Heritage England complained about because it slightly appeared in that view eroding away part of the sky between the Cheesegrater and the Cathedral. Minuscule amount in the grand scheme of things, but it does show how challenging it is to build around the City.

Comments are closed.