London could develop in several very different ways. One of them follows the urbicidal model applied liberally across the globe in the past decades, whiles others will implement known techniques to generate and support a living, resilient urban fabric. The first model kills the living fabric by driving skyscrapers into it at some pint, 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 asme: the death of the immediate region. Contrary to much-publicized views in the media, overconcentration and vertical isolation only adds unimaginable 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.