On Thu, 19 Nov 2009 01:16:09 -0800 (PST), MIG
wrote:
On 19 Nov, 09:10, Bruce wrote:
Admittedly, it was a massive statement. *The "Arch" became a familiar,
but ultimately pointless landmark. *

I've always felt the same about Canary Wharf Jubilee station, which
everyone but me seems to rave over, but which I would consider to be
an ostentatious sculpture rather than architecture.

It's a rectangular concrete hole, probably created by pumping water
out of a dock, and fails to protect its occupants from the cold in
winter. Putting a sculpture on top of it doesn't make it more fit for
purpose.


Yes, I agree. It is a fine structure and a very impressive piece of
architecture. But totally unnecessary for a Tube station. Those tiny
Tube trains seem so out of place in such a grand design.

Another is Westminster, on the same Jubilee line. As a civil
engineer, I find it a most impressive monument to below-ground civil
engineering, almost on a par with a major bridge. But I do wonder
whether such a huge (and hugely expensive) hole in the ground was
absolutely necessary.