# Europes best future supertall?



## The Boy David (Sep 14, 2004)

Acch the Shard of Glass wins every time for me - personally I think that when completed, LBT will be one of the World's finest 'scrapers, not just Europe's


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

3tmk said:


> They're both amazing, but I prefer the Federation better.
> Although Europe's getting some more supertalls in Ukraine and Istanbul


Turkey isnt in europe yet


----------



## www.sercan.de (Aug 10, 2003)

newcastle kid said:


> Turkey isnt in europe yet


But Istanbul


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

I personally love LBT, and even though DIFA(Londons other tall) might stil be taller i think LBT is a better nomination.

Personally i think it is the best, this is how i would rank the others (if we count istanbul)

2. Dubai towers 1 Istanbul
3. Moscow complex Federation Moscow
4. Bishopsgate tower London
5. ?

I have heard of more but i need pics!

lets all rate them, its fun!

(Oh, and by tall i am thinking 300m+)


----------



## SE9 (Apr 26, 2005)

LBT! Great Shape & design. I like Federations 2 connected buildings, but I dislike their overall shape.


----------



## www.sercan.de (Aug 10, 2003)

newcastle kid said:


> I personally love LBT, and even though DIFA(Londons other tall) might stil be taller i think LBT is a better nomination.
> 
> Personally i think it is the best, this is how i would rank the others (if we count istanbul)
> 
> ...


Dou you really think that LBT will be the highest in London?
Wait 1-2 years and London will show a +400m tower

Personally i like the DoI more than DTI








but its not +300m 

moscow has a lot +300m towers


----------



## Intoxication (Jul 24, 2005)

The shard of glass looks much better than the federation tower


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

www.sercan.de said:


> Dou you really think that LBT will be the highest in London?
> Wait 1-2 years and London will show a +400m tower


Do you think so? That would be nice!

Europe has never really been known for its skyscrapers, outshadowed by asia and north America, and now even the middle east...

But we'll show em! WE'LL SHOW EM ALL!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Really I think most of Europe is becoming amazing on the skyscraper architecture


----------



## 909 (Oct 22, 2003)

I prefer LBT, it's design has imo more style.


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

How do i add a poll?


----------



## london-b (Jul 31, 2004)

909 said:


> I prefer LBT, it's design has imo more style.


I agree


----------



## malec (Apr 17, 2005)

Same here. I think they're both amazing but the shard is just that bit better.


----------



## crazyevildude (Aug 15, 2005)

newcastle kid said:


> I personally love LBT, and even though DIFA(Londons other tall) might stil be taller i think LBT is a better nomination.
> 
> Personally i think it is the best, this is how i would rank the others (if we count istanbul)
> 
> ...


Like Russia, Turkey is patially in Europe although, again like Russia, the majority of the country is in Asia. The Bosphorus straits is the deviding point. Istanbul straddles this deviding line, putting the city on two seperate continents (unique for such a major city I believe). I believe the Dubai Towers will be built on the European side of the strait. So they are infact in Europe, just.

But yeah. I think I'd agree with your order. Although I'm confident a couple of new super tall proposals will come up in the next few years.


----------



## VelesHomais (Sep 1, 2004)

Kyiv:

Well, here is proposed Ukrainian super tall. First proposal was 402m high but then this area of the city got rid of any height restrictions and the new project of it is higher.

I present to you the first project, which is similar but different to a new one. I don't have any good renderings of the new proposal.





































It will be visible from a future business-centre ( cluster ) of skyscrapers. 
Thanks to www.archunion.com.ua


----------



## mopc (Jan 31, 2005)

Great designs!!!


----------



## Stratosphere 2020 (Sep 15, 2002)

Federation looks sleek and futuristic.


----------



## TallBox (Sep 21, 2002)

^that Ukraining tower shouts Tuntex Sky City at me. That's not a good thing.


----------



## TallBox (Sep 21, 2002)

1. Tower of Russia (if it's still happening)
2. LBT
3. Complex Federation


----------



## Pavlo (Dec 28, 2004)

This is the new proposal, or rather an edit to the early proposal for the 400 meter tower for Kyiv, Ukraine:


----------



## wjfox (Nov 1, 2002)

1. LBT
2. Bishopsgate Tower
3. Complex Federation


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

Is it going to have the Serbian flag as well?


----------



## Ultramatic (Jul 6, 2009)

*What a fantastic vid. The Hermitage reminded me a bit of our lost Twin Towers. I certainly hope they get built. *


----------



## El_Greco (Apr 1, 2005)

Pansori said:


> And, coth, what's exactly wrong with The Shard?


The fact its not in Moscow? :dunno:


----------



## Turbosnail (Dec 8, 2004)

^^ Exactly.. I think it's Russia or nothing for him - not really a fan of architecture.


----------



## coth (Oct 16, 2003)

you can try apply the same for youself. i'm not denying that both city of capitals and mercury turned out to be worse than they were on rendering. 

and you both needs to grow up and learn how to be tolerant. constant offending is really very childish and not making you popular.

El_Greco
you know to how to read russian forum. so feel free to read my comments on projects with same type of glass in russian forum. all of them are negative.


----------



## Turbosnail (Dec 8, 2004)

coth said:


> Definitely not, it's got worst glass among all built and u/c supertalls in Europe. Way too cheap. Actually none of European supertalls is nice. All of them turned out much worse than they were on renders.





coth said:


> There is already cladding for a dozens of floors. When finished we will able to say how good is it looks from away. Now we already can say it's doesn't look good when looking close to it.





coth said:


> you can try apply the same for youself. i'm not denying that both city of capitals and mercury turned out to be worse than they were on rendering.
> 
> and you both needs to grow up and learn how to be tolerant. constant offending is really very childish and not making you popular.
> 
> ...



Oh come off it - I've asked you questions to explain your previous posts which you haven't answered. I accept that architecture is subjective but I'd like to know how much the Shard cladding cost because I didn't know it was cheap and also you say that "we" know it doesn't look good looking up close - who is we? I can't really see how that is offensive or childish - they're very basic questions, Coth.. and hardly intolerant.


----------



## coth (Oct 16, 2003)

You didn't ask any questions. You just threw insults.

As i noted - glass looks too cheap and simple - tintless, transparent, flat with almost no reflection.


----------



## cardiff (Jul 26, 2005)

glad its not got a tint, is opaque or is too reflective, all those things would make the shard look gimiky and tacky. The shards beauty is in its elgant design, made unfussy and enhanced by the classy cladding, if you want gaudy then have vegas or dubai.


----------



## Dimethyltryptamine (Aug 22, 2009)

I beg to differ (re; dark and reflective tint = tacky). If done correctly, a dark and reflective tint can look amazing. While I don't _mind_ the Shard's glass, I definitely think the design of the structure makes up for what the glass may lack.


----------



## Turbosnail (Dec 8, 2004)

coth said:


> You didn't ask any questions. You just threw insults.
> 
> As i noted - glass looks too cheap and simple - tintless, transparent, flat with almost no reflection.


Sheesh, man - you must be very easily insulted, that wasn't how I meant to come across but at least at last you've given a bit of substance to your opinions in that post although I think your opinions have now lost a bit of credibility by saying the cladding has almost no reflection :lol:


----------



## pierretoulouse (Sep 9, 2007)

Srba said:


> ENK Complex *165m*
> PRISHTINA, SERBIA


That complex in Prishtina looks really interesting, but this has nothing to do here, it's not a supertall and using this thread for serbian propaganda is a bit cheap lol. Im pretty sure that serbian flag will not be there, as Prishtina is officialy in an other country, Kosovo.

Same for the icon tower, it's not a supertall. As for this thread I think the shard will suit its skyline the best and hermitage tower will look the most impressive :cheers:


----------



## El_Greco (Apr 1, 2005)

coth said:


> El_Greco
> you know to how to read russian forum. so feel free to read my comments on projects with same type of glass in russian forum. all of them are negative.


Fair enough.


----------



## AJIekc (Jul 21, 2008)

Certainly, the Shard - the best supertall of Great Britain, but Europe has for a long time already capital of the best supertalls)


----------



## IrishMan2010 (Aug 16, 2010)

Shard tower London it's impressive.


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

AJIekc said:


> Certainly, the Shard - the best supertall of Great Britain, but Europe has for a long time already capital of the best supertalls)


And that is...?


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

coth said:


> Definitely not, it's got worst glass among all built and u/c supertalls in Europe. Way too cheap.


I agree. What we've seen of the London Bridge Tower (Shard)'s cladding so far is rather cheap. It's like an under average cladding at La Défense. I would have imagined for such a hyped building in the center of their city they would have invested in a more sophisticated cladding, like for example the cladding of Tour Opus at La Défense.


----------



## Ejit (Jan 28, 2010)

brisavoine said:


> I agree. What we've seen of the London Bridge Tower (Shard)'s cladding so far is rather cheap. It's like an under average cladding at La Défense. I would have imagined for such a hyped building in the center of their city they would have invested in a more sophisticated cladding, like for example the cladding of Tour Opus at La Défense.


For me such cladding is the opposite of sophistication. Sophistication is subtle, like the Shard.
It's certainly not cheap, and it spans the entire floor unlike the Federation Tower, if I remember correctly. In fact in a thread pitting LBT againt the Fed Tower I find it laughable that the _former's_ cladding is being called 'cheap'.

The Shard's cladding suits it perfectly. It looks like a glass shard. It's also somewhat distinguished, rather than resembling the appearance of every other Chinese tower.

I find LBT much more aesthetically appealing than the Russian tower.
However, the Hermitage Towers planned for La Defense are by far my favourite in Europe and probably the world.

I was going to use that to suggest I'm not just being patriotic, but seem to remember Hermitage's architect is British. Oh well. But yes, skyscrapers are not something I'm particularly patriotic about, just opinionated.


----------



## BE0GRAD (May 29, 2010)

Pansori said:


> Is it going to have the Serbian flag as well?


Well , Albanians are insisting on the Serbian flag being there but the government in Belgrade is opposed cuz it isn't their official building. We'll start negotiations on it soon.


----------



## italiano_pellicano (Feb 22, 2010)

*Milano , Italia*


----------



## aclifford (Jan 22, 2007)

coth said:


> As i noted - glass looks too cheap and simple - tintless, transparent, flat with almost no reflection.





brisavoine said:


> I agree. What we've seen of the London Bridge Tower (Shard)'s cladding so far is rather cheap. It's like an under average cladding at La Défense. I would have imagined for such a hyped building in the center of their city they would have invested in a more sophisticated cladding, like for example the cladding of Tour Opus at La Défense.


Renzo Piano on the shards cladding.....

The Shard will use an advanced type of glass with
a low iron content that means it is completely clear,
rather than having the greenish tinge of most
architectural glass.
“If you use low iron glass you end up with something
that really is like a crystal”, he says. “It will not
look like a massive glass meteorite – choom! – as
many towers do. It’s going to be more vibrant and
changing. So depending on the day, the light and the
position of the sun, the building will look different”.


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

^^
Completely agree with that. Reflective/tinted glass is so 80's.


----------



## Blue Flame (Jul 29, 2009)

I would go with Tours Hermitage eventually. For now probably the Shard. kay:


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

aclifford said:


> The Shard will use an advanced type of glass with
> a low iron content that means it is completely clear,
> rather than having the greenish tinge of most
> architectural glass.
> ...


Crystal reflects light. The Shard's cladding doesn't. A totally transparent glass is the most stupid idea I've ever heard. It will be bland. Plus you'll see the stores and curtains inside the building, which is ugly (cf. Cœur Défense tower for instance).


----------



## Mike____ (Mar 15, 2009)

^^ whats wrong with curtains ? not everyone wants to have the sun shinning on their face..


----------



## Luli Pop (Jun 14, 2010)

Hermitage


----------



## Langur (Jan 3, 2008)

I think the Shard is the best by miles. Hermitage is better than anything in Moscow, and pips the Pinnacle too, but it's still nowhere near as elegant and graceful as the Shard. I think this a rock solid contender for the most beautiful skyscraper ever built.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Mike____ said:


> ^^ whats wrong with curtains ? not everyone wants to have the sun shinning on their face..


Curtains are ugly. They distract from the unity of the tower. They create a pixelated effect that many people find unpleasant.

There are intelligent ways to hide the curtains so that they are not visible from the outside (such as tinted glasses, double skins, etc.), but with totally transparent glasses, they are going to be as visible as in Cœur Défense I'm afraid.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Langur said:


> I think this a rock solid contender for the most beautiful skyscraper ever built.


Langur/Monkey and his hyperbolic superlatives still active at SSC I see. :laugh:


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

brisavoine said:


> Curtains are ugly. They distract from the unity of the tower. They create a pixelated effect that many people find unpleasant.
> 
> There are intelligent ways to hide the curtains so that they are not visible from the outside (such as tinted glasses, double skins, etc.), but with totally transparent glasses, they are going to be as visible as in Cœur Défense I'm afraid.


Isn't the LBT going to be double-skinned? That should more or less hide the ugly curtains effect seen on that tower in La Defense.

I am by no means a stubborn advocate of The Shard as the best and only (I believe Langur is exaggerating it a bit ) but I have always found transparent glass to be very sexy and cool which makes the building look light and elegant. The shape of this building is perfectly suited for this. Of course the only way to know for sure is to wait and see. The wait is not too long anyway. I hope we'll be able to come back to this discussions after the facade will be fully installed on the entire frame.


----------



## aclifford (Jan 22, 2007)

More from Renzo Piano

....Piano is similarly proud of the building’s sustainable
credentials: it will use around 30% less energy
than other comparable buildings. This is achieved
by a combination of sophisticated materials,
such as the triple-skin glass façade containing
computer-controlled venetian blinds that will shield
occupants from the sun and reduce the need for
air conditioning. “At night, and when you don’t
have sun – which happens in London – the blinds
will disappear”, he says.

http://www.shardlondonbridge.com/downloads/brochure/LBQ_book_final.pdf


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

Ok, so it will be *triple-skinned* facade and not even double skinned. I guess this is where the "ugly curtains" argument comes to an end.


----------



## Langur (Jan 3, 2008)

brisavoine said:


> Langur/Monkey and his hyperbolic superlatives still active at SSC I see. :laugh:


You're so envious. You must really hate the Shard, right?


----------



## OMG!WTF! (Aug 21, 2010)

brisavoine said:


> Langur/Monkey and his hyperbolic superlatives still active at SSC I see. :laugh:


Brisavoine and his anti British trolling still active at SSC i see.......

Tell me, what shade of green are you every time you look in the Shard construction thread...?

The fact, that the ONLY time you seem to mention The Shard is to criticise it, speaks volumes about your petty insecurities regarding London.

And the fact you try and compare cladding on towers in LD, which are just about THE biggest collection of cheaply designed,built and clad towers in Europe, shows just how laughable your critiscisms of The Shard is.

Do try better next time...


----------



## OMG!WTF! (Aug 21, 2010)

brisavoine said:


> I agree. What we've seen of the London Bridge Tower (Shard)'s cladding so far is rather cheap. It's like an under average cladding at La Défense.


Seriously WTF....are we looking at the same building...

Picture by 'Chest'










Your trolling of anything UK, really is desperate Brisavoine.....hno:


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

^^Keep on going with your ad hominems Xfire101 (or should I say RiffRaff? CrazyMac?), you'll be banned as quickly as the last times under your different pseudonyms. :lol:

PS: Rather bland cladding in your pic by the way.


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Pansori said:


> Isn't the LBT going to be double-skinned?


Some people say the façade we see now is the definite one, other say another layer of cladding is going to be added, so it's difficult to know. That's why I said "so far". So far it's rather bland and disappointing.


----------



## OMG!WTF! (Aug 21, 2010)

brisavoine said:


> ^^Keep on going with your ad hominems Xfire101 (or should I say RiffRaff? CrazyMac?), you'll be banned as quickly as the last times under your different pseudonyms. :lol:.


You keep alluding to this every post i make....either prove it or STFU....



brisavoine said:


> PS: Rather bland cladding in your pic by the way.


Not as bland as your trolling.....what a sad, bitter and twisted individual you are....


----------



## Jex7844 (Mar 26, 2009)

Brisavoine, I had never seen that rendering before! Where did you get it from? I guess it's not very recent as we can see the late lamented _Signal _ tower in the background...(I'm not being ironic!)

What about that tower in the foreground (bottom left)? I didn't know they planned to build one right there...cool!

Thanks anyway...


----------



## Mike____ (Mar 15, 2009)

^^ The Hermitage will be the best


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Jex7844 said:


> Brisavoine, I had never seen that rendering before! Where did you get it from? I guess it's not very recent as we can see the late lamented _Signal _ tower in the background...(I'm not being ironic!)
> 
> What about that tower in the foreground (bottom left)? I didn't know they planned to build one right there...cool!
> 
> Thanks anyway...


The rendering comes from the Axe Majeur project (burrying the A14/N13 in a tunnel below Neuilly-sur-Seine and creating a true urban continuity between the City of Paris and La Défense). The tower to the left is one proposal in that Axe Majeur project. Also note that Signal Tower has not been abandonned according to Jean Nouvel (he's still negociating with some investors).

Other views of the Axe Majeur after the A14/N13 is burried below the ground in a tunnel:


















Today:









Tomorrow:


----------



## Bez_imena (Oct 25, 2009)

BELGRADE | BESIX Tower | 333m










*
Canceled!*


----------



## Jex7844 (Mar 26, 2009)

^^Not a big waste Bez, let's admit that its design was pretty "fugly", hope they find a better project.
*--------------------------------------------------------------------------​*Thanks Brisavoine for the informative renders, to be honest I was unaware of the _Axe Majeur_ project...would be so much better indeed with all that greenery & the underground roads! Let's wait & see...


----------



## Indeleble (Feb 21, 2009)

The Shard:drool:
Love it!


----------



## cardiff (Jul 26, 2005)

Not sure why everyone seems to love hermitage, really ungracefull and awkwardly shaped buildings that spoil the symetry of La defense by not only being twin towers on one side of the grand arch but are also very much out of the cluster. now Phare is a stunning piece of architecture and the only highrise in Europe to match the shard and pinnacle (all 3 IMO some fo the best modern skyscrapers ever!)


----------



## Vladivostok53 (Feb 28, 2009)

*Eurasia Moscow*


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

cardiff said:


> Not sure why everyone seems to love hermitage, really ungracefull and awkwardly shaped buildings that spoil the symetry of La defense by not only being twin towers on one side of the grand arch but are also very much out of the cluster. now Phare is a stunning piece of architecture and the only highrise in Europe to match the shard and pinnacle (all 3 IMO some fo the best modern skyscrapers ever!)


That's the whole point - "IMO". IMO, Hermitage towers are amazing and from the renderings they look more striking than The Shard... to me at least. Again, I'm not denying that to you it may be the other way around as, it seems, it really is. 

Regarding the cluster, Hermitage will be much more in the "cluster" than The Shard yet you don't seem to have any objections. I must say The Shard has a really bad location. It would look much better in the City or, even better, Canary Wharf. London Bridge is certainly not the best location for city's No.1 modern landmark.


----------



## Mike____ (Mar 15, 2009)

^^yea.. I like the shard but the Hermitage looks even better!
they will be beautiful!


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

I completely forgot about this thread.

This recent picture by forumer Chest shows what Renzo Piano was talking about quite well:










And another by Nauticat:











I for one can't wait to see the effect when the cladding is finished.


----------



## cardiff (Jul 26, 2005)

Pansori said:


> That's the whole point - "IMO". IMO, Hermitage towers are amazing and from the renderings they look more striking than The Shard... to me at least. Again, I'm not denying that to you it may be the other way around as, it seems, it really is.
> 
> Regarding the cluster, Hermitage will be much more in the "cluster" than The Shard yet you don't seem to have any objections. I must say The Shard has a really bad location. It would look much better in the City or, even better, Canary Wharf. London Bridge is certainly not the best location for city's No.1 modern landmark.


I just dont see where you are coming from, to me hermitage is top heavy and looks unstable (yes i know from other angles its the oposite effect), this top heavy effect leaves them feeling very inelegant 'IMO'. The whole premise of the buildings is based on this top heavy effect (which you either love or hate) but also there seems to be a lack of architectural detail as seen in the shard and Phare which really makes them not stand out as architectural masterpieces. The fact that there are two towers negates them as stand out pieces of archtecture as there are two of them and therefore not unique, with no apparent link as seen in the Petronas towers (again missing the level of detail they have). Where the shard succeds is that it is a singular expression of architecture, soaring high above all around it, such as the eiffel tower, Empire state, taipei 101, burj dubai, IFC2, etc. It would be less of an architectural masterpiece if it was in a cluster, as it would loose its soar factor, its unique form would be hidden and its architectural detail lost. I wouldnt say london had a number 1 modern landmark as it could easily be contested amongst a number of buildings but IMO most comonly the London eye, and in skyscraper terms Swiss RE has laid a stong identity. All of this is IMO but maybe you can point me in the direction of where you are looking at hermitage from?


----------



## Jex7844 (Mar 26, 2009)

You're entitled to your opinion Cardiff, no problem about that. However I particularly disagree on that *The fact that there are two towers negates them as stand out pieces of archtecture as there are two of them and therefore not unique*, indeed _Hermitage Plaza _twin towers are working very well IMO because they're 2, they have a great design but not sure that one single tower would give such an impressive "wow", they are meant to be 2. A project like this (furthermore 'mixed use') hasn't been seen so far in Europe, there are lots of enthusiastic feedbacks from our american comrades (among others) who would have loved to have those built instead of 1WTC (which I like much though), the former WTC would not have been that iconic if they hadn't been twins I think (visible in so many movies). I personally love the design of our _Hermitage Plaza_ towers (very thin at the base and then gradually wider as they go up), I also love the fact that the sideways view actually is the exact shape of the tower, but on the other way round...to my knowledge, I don't know any other building having that particularity!
I love _Foster_'s designs, and between his twins & myself, it's been love at first sight, and I'm fairly sure they will be as famous as our beloved _Eiffel tower_ in the decades to come. Let's wait for those to get built, and we'll discuss it then .

PS: _Shard _is a top building as well (I'm used to posting on its thread too).

:wave:


----------



## Brum X (Mar 5, 2007)

Bring it on LONDON ;-)


----------



## cardiff (Jul 26, 2005)

I guess it just comes down to whether you like the top heavyness or not, i dont but other do. Fora supertall i would rather Paris had something more Parisian, avant garde and basically Phare.


----------



## Newcastle Guy (Jul 8, 2005)

Jex7844 said:


> You're entitled to your opinion Cardiff, no problem about that. However I particularly disagree on that *The fact that there are two towers negates them as stand out pieces of archtecture as there are two of them and therefore not unique*, indeed _Hermitage Plaza _twin towers are working very well IMO because they're 2, they have a great design but not sure that one single tower would give such an impressive "wow", they are meant to be 2.


I do agree with this. I like the designs, however I think the fact that it's a twin tower project gives it an extra edge and will make them more iconic. That's not to say they're poor individually though. The original WTC would not have been as iconic had it been a single tower, IMO. There's got to be a reason why everyone remembers them as 'the Twin Towers'. And despite the comments that it unbalances the cluster, the more I think about it, I just don't think it would work if there was one either side of the Arch. Not to mention the fact that it would be harder to acquire to separate sites. I think I prefer it the way it is.

P.S. Here is a great new photo of the Shard's construction taken by new forumer, pe7er_w2lich.


----------



## AMS guy (Jun 27, 2003)

It's going to be a battle between The Shard and The Ermitage. I can't decide yet.


----------



## FLAWDA-FELLA (Oct 8, 2005)

I thought there was a Supertall planned for Frankfurt that was around 300 meters high? :dunno:


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

cardiff said:


> i would rather Paris had something more Parisian, avant garde and basically Phare.


Paris will also have its 284m (932 ft) Osmose Tower by Jean-Michel Wilmotte, so don't worry about avant-garde. 



















The French chef Guy Savoy plans to open the higest restaurant in Europe on the 71st floor of the tower:


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

^^
Is this getting built? Now THAT's a design!


----------



## brisavoine (Mar 19, 2006)

Wilmotte is currently negociating with some Chinese investors from what we know. The site where it is to be built is currently empty, so it will be much easier to obtain the building permit and start construction than with either Phare or Hermitage.


----------



## Pansori (Apr 26, 2006)

They better get the permit. That would easily be my favorite skyscraper in Europe. So graceful.


----------



## Ingenioren (Jan 18, 2008)

Very easy choice, it's the one in St.Pet


----------

