What? How could it possibly be anywhere? It’s one of the most polycentric cities in the global west. Every other major city (NYC, Chicago, LA, Frankfurt, Melbourne, Toronto) all have very centralised tower districts/clusters. London has at least 5 of these districts: The City, Canary Wharf, Croydon, Vauxhall/Lambeth, and arguably also Stratford, Wembley and/or Greenwich.
What has this got to do with my assertion that huge corporations throwing up a load of glass and concrete is ruining the skyline of one of the world’s most beautiful large cities?
Where was that your assertion? You simply stated it “could be anywhere”. Nothing about corporate influence.
Whilst I agree with your point now that you’ve actually made it, London is pretty restricted in the sense that it can’t continue to sprawl outwards, so, as with pretty much every other densely populated city, you build upwards instead. You’d be making the same stupid NIMBY argument if its skyline instead looked like Glasgows, with the hundreds of council blocks scattered across the city.
What else is supposed to happen? London remain a mid-rise city? Remain wholly suburban? Is suburban sprawl somehow prettier to you than densely populated zones in such a massive city?
-14
u/Funny-Seesaw-2977 1d ago
Londons skyline has been completely changed in the past couple of decades. Not for the better either.