Pyromancer wrote:


Euston is pretty much a lost cause, I think. The only real solution
would be to send a team of trainee architects untainted by the scourge
of "modernism" to examine St Pancras, and Glasgow Central, and
Manchester Piccadilly, and learn how a main line terminus station
should be designed, with beautiful and imposing buildings, a glass
roof supported by impressive-looking steelwork, and using traditional
materials like brick and stone. And of course to include a replica of
the "arch".

I don't know. Despite its faults, Euston does at least get one thing
right: it keeps the trains firmly out of sight of the concourse. For
many people, it's bad enough having to make a long journey by train,
without having to be reminded of how depressing trains can be by
actually having to look at them while you wait.

That's one thing that St Pancras only managed to get right with the
latest redevelopment, giving us that new basement-level shopping mall
and concourse, tucked nicely away from the trains. (After all, unlike
stations, shopping malls are places that most people actually enjoy
visiting spending time in.) And before it was redeveloped, St Pancras
was one of the bleakest, gloomiest, most depressing stations in London.

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 13:31:20 +0000, Pyromancer wrote

Euston is pretty much a lost cause, I think. The only real solution
would be to send a team of trainee architects untainted by the scourge
of "modernism" to examine St Pancras, and Glasgow Central, and
Manchester Piccadilly, and learn how a main line terminus station should
be designed, with beautiful and imposing buildings, a glass roof
supported by impressive-looking steelwork, and using traditional
materials like brick and stone.

Given that the railway is supposed to be the transport mode of the future -
new major terminals should reflect the best we can offer today. By all
means keep the best of what's gone before - the recent rebirth of St Pancras
shows how well that can be done, but pastiche and/or replica doesn't suit a
modern public building such as (say) Euston.

Look at Chep Lap Kok, built from scratch to do the job and act as a state of
the art structure into the bargain. No-one would have seriously suggested
that the terminal should have been a replica of Kai Tak.

In it's day Euston was a staggering building; a true examplar of Britain's
New Railway. Sadly it's since been debased to a point where it's of no real
architectural merit and barely functions as an effective public space.

Zaha Hadid, IM Pei, Frank Gehry, even Richard Rogers, could produce a
stunning terminal but, as you say, "that'd cost money, and no-one in the DfT
(who at the end of the day pay for such things) seems to believe that it's
important for the capital city terminus of one of our most prestigious routes
should be anything other than dull and utilitarian"

On 1 Feb, 14:49, Stimpy wrote:
Given that the railway is supposed to be the transport mode of the future -
new major terminals should reflect the best we can offer today.
There's no justification in claiming that classicism isn't the best we
can offer today.

pastiche and/or replica doesn't suit a
modern public building such as (say) Euston.
The new design is a pastiche. Its a pastiche of 60s modernism.

Look at Chep Lap Kok
Very clinical isn't it.

In it's day Euston was a staggering building
That day was before the 1960s.

Zaha Hadid, IM Pei, Frank Gehry, even Richard Rogers, could produce a
stunning terminal
No. They could produce an eyesore. They've done that before.

In message , at 14:39:11 on Sun, 1 Feb
2009, solar penguin remarked:
That's one thing that St Pancras only managed to get right with the
latest redevelopment, giving us that new basement-level shopping mall
and concourse, tucked nicely away from the trains.

It's only "tucked away" from the domestic trains because the latter have
been relegated to a windswept 1950's loo-wall structure built entirely
outside the original station, and a route-march from the rest of
humanity.
--
Roland Perry

"lonelytraveller" wrote in
message
...

Zaha Hadid, IM Pei, Frank Gehry, even Richard Rogers, could produce a
stunning terminal
No. They could produce an eyesore. They've done that before.

Before advocating Zaha Hadid as an architect for any project, check out the
analysis done by a Real Firefighter (tm) on her Fire Station (in Germany
IIRC).

--
Tim
http://tim-fenton.fotopic.net/

On Sat, 31 Jan 2009 17:12:55 -0800 (PST), lonelytraveller
wrote:

I don't know why they bother wasting the money; they're planning to
build an ugly monstrosity that's nearly identical to the horrific
inhumanity that's there now.

ITYM very effective station. It's warm, bright, spacious and
accessible (OK, the platforms aren't, but it isn't designed for you to
wait on them, except for the commuter services). A fine station by
all accounts, and one that so long as it is structurally sound could
carry on as it is for another 20 years.

The one thing I'd change is to add a barriered walkway either up the
middle or up both sides, marked for people not to stand there, so
people can reach the platforms from the outside world without
crowd-dodging.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 14:39:11 -0000, "solar penguin"
wrote:

That's one thing that St Pancras only managed to get right with the
latest redevelopment, giving us that new basement-level shopping mall
and concourse, tucked nicely away from the trains.

I find it claustrophobic compared with Euston's high-ceilinged Great
Hall, which is certainly deserving of the name.

I wasn't impressed with St P, to be honest. It feels unfinished,
scruffy and poorly-designed. The trainshed is indeed impressive, but
that's all, and I don't go to stations to look at architecture, but to
catch trains.

Paddington is another example of a station that "looks nice" but is
poorly-designed for the passenger. Cold and reeking of diesel fumes,
and "The Lawn" (why's it called that? No grass...) is far too packed
in.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 05:02:36 -0800 (PST), Martin Petrov
wrote:

We had been speculating yesterday that it might be the start of a
temporary ticket office, which made a bit of sense, except I didn't
recall seeing anything on here (or elsewhere) about a definite start
to the work.

It isn't for that. It's for retail space to replace (and add to) that
which was removed to make more circulating space inside the station.

I think they're aiming at a kind of outdoors version of Manc Picc.

Neil

--
Neil Williams
Put my first name before the at to reply.

In message , Neil Williams
writes

I wasn't impressed with St P, to be honest.
[...]
The trainshed is indeed impressive, but that's all,

There are some nice features on the ground floor, but the overwhelming
impression is of just another shopping mall, which will probably go the
way of many such places in the current economic climate.

Paddington is another example of a station that "looks nice" but is
poorly-designed for the passenger. Cold and reeking of diesel fumes,
and "The Lawn" (why's it called that? No grass...) is far too packed
in.

IIRC, the lawn was once part of the stationmaster's garden.
--
Paul Terry

Neil Williams wrote:
On Sun, 1 Feb 2009 14:39:11 -0000, "solar penguin"
wrote:

That's one thing that St Pancras only managed to get right with the
latest redevelopment, giving us that new basement-level shopping mall
and concourse, tucked nicely away from the trains.

I find it claustrophobic compared with Euston's high-ceilinged Great
Hall, which is certainly deserving of the name.

I wasn't impressed with St P, to be honest. It feels unfinished,
scruffy and poorly-designed. The trainshed is indeed impressive, but
that's all, and I don't go to stations to look at architecture, but to
catch trains.

They could raise the money to make it look finished by charging a quid
to everyone who says "yes, the old bit looks nice, but when are they
going to put something permanent in place of that temporary bit where
the MML/EMT/Thameslink/FCC on a weekend go from?"

The last time I was playing "hunt the snorbans train" I was surprised to
find there are no ticket machines around the MML platforms, you have to
go downstairs.
--
Arthur Figgis Surrey, UK