Comment by flotzam

5 hours ago

> 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.

The problem is worse outside London, hotels in conservation areas that get planning for health clubs on the basis that locals can buy memberships too, then quietly withdrawn. A car park that should be open for public paid parking becomes private.

It's a fantastic idea, but enforcement sucks on intangible things like this. In a few years time I'm sure it will be 'closed for maintenance' then never reopen to the public or a nice restaurant will go up there and suddenly you'll need a restaurant booking to use the lift.

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

  • Capacity may indeed be a reason for requiring advance bookings.

    But it doesn't explain the ridiculous security (scanning gates, had to take off my hat and belt, insulin pump was inspected), the prohibition of "professional" photography equipment, prohibition of own food and drinks (again, diabetes, I want to carry some lemonade and a bar for emergency), etc etc.

    Is it to counter terrorism? To boost consuming at the establishments? Or is it a lame excuse thats in reality just a higher bar to entry?

    • > Is it to counter terrorism?

      They’re worried that if there was an incident they might get sued for having inadequate security.

      I’ve spent a lot of time going to places with security like this (airports, museums etc) and getting a belt with plastic buckles (you can get them at outdoor clothing stores) saves a lot of hassle.

    • Have you visited The View from The Shard? A very expensive visit, with exactly the same security checks as Sky Garden. Security in tall buildings is high (even if that security is mostly theatre).

      "Certain items cannot be brought into The View from The Shard including large bags and backpacks, over the size of 22 x 15 x 8 inches (55 x 38 x 20 cm) or other large equipment."

      "We ask guests to walk through metal detectors, which use a low-frequency electromagnetic field to look for metal items."

      https://www.theviewfromtheshard.com/frequently-asked-questio...

      2 replies →

    • >Is it to counter terrorism? To boost consuming at the establishments? Or is it a lame excuse thats in reality just a higher bar to entry?

      Incentives align among all three.

  • Ok that one looks legit :)

    I was thinking more about his experience with e.g. 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.

    • Sky Garden is really the only one that does not make it hard. No need to book - just pop up there for with your sandwiches for lunch, and I think it's the best roof garden in city.

      You might need to queue for a little while on a weekend or at prime lunchtime.

      The others you need to book weeks ahead, so agree with the previous post that they do make it hard. Sky Garden is not one of them.

      1 reply →

  • Lived in london for over a decade, never been and I also don't think I know anyone else who's been.

    To be fair it's not just that, you won't find many actual londoners in central full stop unless they're going to work

    • > Lived in london for over a decade

      > actual londoners

      So which is it? Lots of expats in London. They aren’t tourist but they aren’t born-and-bred londoners, are they?

      1 reply →

    • I wouldn’t say that’s an accurate generalisation.

      I’ll often meet and hang out with friends in central London.

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

  • 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.

  • > This is the country where organised marches must have police approval and follow an approved route

    You have to notify the police not get approval. They can "impose conditions and restrictions" for safety or to limit the rights of others to travel freely, after which they'll also be somewhat liable to protect you from counter-protesters, or lunatics trying to drive their car at you.

    Just about every country requires some kind of advance notice if its not just a few people walking along the pavement/sidewalk and your going to obstruct traffic or block others movement

    https://groups.friendsoftheearth.uk/resources/your-rights-an...

  • Disagree on that vibe. The museums are usually free in London, for example. Haven't seen that in many other cities.

  • Even within London people dislike each other!

    Saw many non-Arsenal fans cheering for PSG yesterday.

  • There are thousands of protests per year in central London. The larger ones (tens of thousands of people) are going to be disrupting public transport routes than people rely on. There's an approved route so that disruption can be managed. Nothing to do with being 'privately owned'. It also doesn't help that for a large number of people 'protesting' means travelling into London, getting drunk, and fighting.

  • 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?

    edit: responding to your edit, of course many British people hate London and for many valid reasons, but your reasoning is very American. Very few British people share that American view of freedom and would describe London as “privately owned”.

    • > but your reasoning is very American.

      For god's sake how ridiculous. Give over

      What's your basis for commenting on us Brits? You can't even spell UK correctly (we don't use full stops. That's an Americanism / hypercorrection). You spell with a z, so not a Brit

      14 replies →