Read the paper:
– A Future Without Starchitects
Chapter 4.3 in Jonathan Manns, Ed. Kaleidoscope City: Reflections on Planning and London, RTPI Press, London, 2014, pages 123-131: http://zeta.math.utsa.edu/~yxk833/Kaleidoscope-London.pdf
From the ingress of the paper:
London could develop in several very different ways. One of them follows the urbanicidal model applied liberally across the globe in the past decades, whilst others will implement known techniques to generate and support a living, resilient urban fabric. The first model kills the living city fabric by driving skyscrapers into it at some point, in the same way one might kill a vampire by driving a stake through his/her heart. Indeed, although the intention of erecting a skyscraper is different (the promise of financial returns for the property owner, contractor, engineering firm, and mercenary architect), the result is the same: the death of the immediate region. Contrary to much-publicized views in the media, overconcentration and vertical isolation only adds unmanageable strain to infrastructure and transport, while not helping actual city life. A living city functions at various intermediate densities, as shown in the successful parts of London (successful in having a vibrant urban life like the West End and not a useless flux of transient workers like the City of London). This is not only well evidenced, but the lessons of biourbanism suggest some simple reforms of the planning system which could secure this vibrancy and resilience across the capital. – Nikos A. Salingaros