| ▲ | London's Free Roof Terraces(diamondgeezer.blogspot.com) |
| 86 points by zeristor 4 hours ago | 23 comments |
| |
|
| ▲ | flotzam 35 minutes ago | parent | next [-] |
| > more likely to get planning permission if their new skyscraper included a free public roof terrace If that's the deal, it's crazy that some of those places are getting away with then discouraging the public from actually going there. Book your visit in advance! Present ID! Photography forbidden! This grumpy security guard will be hovering nearby <3 It's like Nathan For You S03E01 where a store advertises a $1 TV, then tells the drawn in would-be customers to please respect the black tie dress code, crawl through a tiny door, and squeeze past the alligator. |
| |
| ▲ | fontain 14 minutes ago | parent | next [-] | | You must book in advance because they’re incredibly popular, huge queues, long waits, and capacity limits. The Sky Garden (Fenchurch Building) is huge, beautiful and absolutely packed with people. Many people consider it a London must visit. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/20_Fenchurch_Street#Sky_garden | | |
| ▲ | flotzam 7 minutes ago | parent [-] | | Ok that one looks legit :) I was thinking more about his experience with the last one on the page, Roof Garden at The Post Building: > I still don't understand why it's here nor why it's open daily, nor why they insist on Photo ID "and a full written name" before they'll let you up. However I didn't get the chance to test this out yesterday because when I arrived the roof terrace was "closed due to essential maintenance work", inconveniencing probably nobody but myself. |
| |
| ▲ | gib444 32 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | This is the country where organised marches must have police approval and follow an approved route (and most acute in London). Hardly a surprise! London's vibe is: 'privately owned, and you're lucky to be here' Edit: I'm British btw (and currently sat in a pub in London) in case people downvote me thinking I'm a yank lol. There are many people who dislike London and the UK who aren't yanks | | |
| ▲ | wolvoleo a few seconds ago | parent | next [-] | | In most countries in Europe organized marches and protests must be run by authorities. It's pretty normal here. Protesting is a legal right but the authorities do have the right to restrict it for public order reasons. For example they often will insist on separate routes to keep conflicting groups apart. It makes sense too. | |
| ▲ | deaux 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Its not as if things are any better in the country that boasts the most about its freedoms regarding access to supposedly public spaces: https://www.instagram.com/780_lord_of_bench | |
| ▲ | fontain 10 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | How many protestors did the U.K. police kill in the last few years, compared to, say, a very free country… like the U.S? |
|
|
|
| ▲ | rbbydotdev 11 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Alas it also had great views into the apartments at Neo Bankside whose residents ultimately sued and won, thus if you arrive by lift today you can only visit the cafe bummer |
|
| ▲ | lorenzotenti 37 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I built https://exploralista.io exactly for this use case. Still waiting for the universe to make up for my lack of marketing skills. |
| |
| ▲ | croisillon 15 minutes ago | parent [-] | | it's a nice idea! but yes there is very sparse information and instead of examples i get "NetworkError when attempting to fetch resource." and it says "free" here and there but free forever, free until? |
|
|
| ▲ | dgellow an hour ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| > Tate Modern had high hopes for the 10th floor of the Blatnavik Building with its cafe and a four-sided observation terrace with excellent views of the Thames. Alas it also had great views into the apartments at Neo Bankside whose residents ultimately sued and won, thus if you arrive by lift today you can only visit the cafe. I was curious about what type of arguments you could make to win a case like this. "The Supreme Court commented that the degree of overlooking from visitors to the Tate gallery was so extreme it subjected the residents to being “much like being on display in a zoo” and held that there is no reason why constant visual intrusion cannot give rise to liability for nuisance." https://www.tlt.com/insights-and-events/insight/supreme-cour... Really strange take, that applies to so many situations where tourists gather |
| |
| ▲ | RobotToaster an hour ago | parent | next [-] | | It affected rich people, wouldn't surprise me if one of them knew the judge. | | |
| ▲ | fontain 37 minutes ago | parent [-] | | The case was a very big deal in London. The outcome was not one of bias, but complicated circumstance. The apartment building was built years before the Tate Modern opened their viewing floor. After the Tate Modern viewing floor opened, visitors to the Tate Modern began photographing and videoing and watching people in the neighbouring apartment building. The judge reasonably determined that there is some sacrifice of privacy made when choosing to live in a glass apartment building, but the Tate Modern's viewing floor's compromise of privacy was so egregious that it should not be allowed regardless of planning permission. There are many buildings all over London that look over one another, many of those occupied by very very rich people, it was not corruption. | | |
| ▲ | ZeWaka 11 minutes ago | parent [-] | | However, Tate got the permission to build the viewing deck before the apartments were built. |
|
| |
| ▲ | l23k4 38 minutes ago | parent | prev | next [-] | | Come on, this was just gross by Tate and the supreme court was right to put a stop to it. I visited the extension before it opened, it was obvious this was going to be a problem. A busy viewing terrace is not an ordinary use of space, building one looking right into private homes isn't cool regardless of how wealthy the residents of those homes are. | |
| ▲ | gib444 35 minutes ago | parent | prev [-] | | Supreme Court judges do not express "takes". They make legal judgements and express legal opinion based on years of experience and deep knowledge of the law. They deserve a bit more respect than a likening to some random Redditor having a "take" | | |
|
|
| ▲ | mgaunard 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| What about Crossrail Place in Canary Wharf, doesn't count? Otherwise there are plenty of other roof terraces which are bars/restaurants. Typically more enjoyable as you don't have to book tickets and you get to enjoy a drink. |
| |
| ▲ | fontain an hour ago | parent [-] | | I think some people might not count Canary Wharf's various gardens as examples of this because while Canary Wharf is a private estate that is open to the public, the parks and green spaces aren't a quiet strategy to get buildings approved, they're part of the estate's broad strategy to be green and welcoming. Canary Wharf actively encourages visitors to all of their green spaces. |
|
|
| ▲ | d1sxeyes 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| I try to pop to One New Change whenever I’m in London just to visit the terrace there. If you’re in the area, worth a look! |
|
| ▲ | rented_mule 2 hours ago | parent | prev | next [-] |
| The equivalent in San Francisco: https://sfpopos.com/ |
|
| ▲ | cbdevidal an hour ago | parent | prev [-] |
| Really cool!! |
