Mile-high Towers For London?

By M@ Last edited 136 months ago
Mile-high Towers For London?

Well, no. This is almost certainly a PR stunt (possibly inspired by our Touch Up London series) and not a likely development. But an interesting concept nevertheless.


The images are by Popularchitecture (and please don't click that link; of all the twatish, unhelpful websites from architecture firms, this takes some beating). Bold as brass, the company are planning mile-high towers in London, each capable of housing 100,000 people.

At the centre of the structure would be a ‘vast internal void’ lit by circular openings every 20 storeys. Each of these ‘holes’ would be used as either public squares or for specialist activities such as ice skating, botanic gardens or swimming pools.

Or, as skyscrapernews suggests, shark tanks for James Bond baddies to drop secret agents into.

Practice founder Tom Teatum

admits the scheme’s scale is verging on ‘almost unbelievable proportions’ but insists there are developers who are interested, ‘in particular because of minimal land value in relation to accommodation’.

Yeah, right. And English Heritage are going to be very interested too. Although it would give them a new ivory tower to sit in.


Last Updated 16 February 2007


If the knobbers can't build a funtional webshite, they haven't got a hope of entering the Mile High Club.


"Ungracefully plonked on top of hundreds of semi-detached houses with no regards for context, the concept is one of 1,500 metre tall towers that are self contained with all the infrastructure that the residential accommodation within needs.
They would have a population of 100,000 split into a dozen sky villages, each with a population of about 8,000. These areas would be separated by huge public spaces, circular in shape that make the plans look as bizarre as something the Tellytubbies would live in."

Didn't we hear all this nonsense in the sixties, and didn't that give rise to the awful sink estates in peckham and camberwell et al that are so troublesome now, and aren't they all being marked for demolition.
Bit odd if you ask me (which in fairness nobody did)

Neal R.

Build 'em! I think that would be great! Completely useless and wasteful and ridiculous, but GREAT! Better than spending it on a war, right? It could be called London's "Nutters Tower".


Pretty useless as accomodation, like 'piersy' suggests, there are huge echoes of the optimism shared in the 60's, and developers are only just coming 'round to the idea of building big complexes again, 40 years on.

However, one of these would make an excellent prison.


Hmm cool I want London 2 be better than American buildings. Though its getting Shard London Bridge. Pitty it isn't being built