On Sep 23, 9:32*am, allanbonnetracy
wrote:
The Euston Arch, which stood in front of London's Euston rail station
until 1962, is set to be restored.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...rch-to-be-rebu...

The arch was originally built in 1838 until it was torn down by modern
town planners almost 50 years ago. Some of its stones were thrown into
a tributary of the River Lea in East London to fill a hole in the
riverbed, but have now been recovered and will be used to restore the
arch to its former glory.

For the past four months, British Waterways has dredged the Prescott
Channel in order to salvage the discarded rock, after historian Dan
Cruickshank tracked them down in 1994.

He has since led the 15-year Euston Arch Trust campaign to reconstruct
the monument, described as the "first great building of the railway
age".

Mr Cruickshank said: "It's destruction was an act of barbarism. Now a
great cultural wrong can be put right."

The 70ft arch, inspired by Roman architecture, was originally designed
by Philip Hardwick. Mr Hardwick, who also helped design Liverpool's
Royal Albert Dock, created the arch as the grand entrance of Euston
Station which opened in 1837.

In the 1960s however, the station's owners, the British Transport
Commission, tore down the Grade II arch amid much protest in order to
build a bigger terminal.

The new £10 million arch will be a replica of the original, but will
have hospitality space, including an underground nightclub in the
foundations, and a banquet hall at the top of the arch. The site of
the original arch is beneath the current station, so a new site on
Euston Road has been suggested. Proposals are set to be submitted to
planning officers next year.

IMHO, it should be placed in a central postition in front of Euston
Station.

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...rch-to-be-rebu...

The 70ft arch, inspired by Roman architecture,

Greek, surely.

Basil Jet wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...rch-to-be-rebu...

The 70ft arch, inspired by Roman architecture,

Greek, surely.

A little research suggests that the Romans had their own distinct version of
"Doric" architecture, so maybe the article was right.

On Sep 23, 6:38*pm, "Basil Jet"
wrote:
Basil Jet wrote:
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/ukne...rch-to-be-rebu....

The 70ft arch, inspired by Roman architecture,

Greek, surely.

A little research suggests that the Romans had their own distinct version of
"Doric" architecture, so maybe the article was right.


The correct description of the architectural style of the Euston Arch
is "Greek Revival".

Given that the revival of ancient Greek and Roman forms and detaIls
was most extensively practised by the Italian architect Andrea
Palladio (1508-1580), who strongly influenced the style of other great
architects including Sr Christopher Wren, it is probably also
appropriate to call it "Palladian".

The design of the interior of the former Great Hall at Euston was also
heavily influenced by the Palladian style.

IMHO, it should be placed in a central postition in front of Euston
Station.


The proposal is to site it between the surviving Lodges on the Euston Road.

http://www.eustonarch.org/images/text/joerobson.jpg

Would look rather good IMO.

General info:

http://www.eustonarch.org/index.php

HTH

C.

On Sep 23, 1:40*pm, Chris Lonsbrough wrote:
IMHO, it should be placed in a central postition in front of Euston
Station.

The proposal is to site it between the surviving Lodges on the Euston Road.

http://www.eustonarch.org/images/text/joerobson.jpg

Would look rather good IMO.

General info:

http://www.eustonarch.org/index.php

Thanks. I agree. That will be excellent.

Decent Urban Fabric 1:Concrete Commies 0

(They had their turn in the 1960s).

On Sep 24, 12:18*am, E27002 wrote:

Thanks. *I agree. *That will be excellent.

Decent Urban Fabric 1:Concrete Commies 0


Unfortunately, the replica "Arch" would be a concrete structure.

Sounds more like a draw. ;-)

Bruce writes:
Thanks. Â*I agree. Â*That will be excellent.

Decent Urban Fabric 1:Concrete Commies 0

Unfortunately, the replica "Arch" would be a concrete structure.

Hmm? It sounds like they're using a lot of the original stone (which
was recovered from a riverbed)...

Anyway, the problem is not concrete. Concrete is a fantastic building
material, with an ancient provenance (first used extensively by the
romans!). There are obviously many many excellent buildings made of
concrete.

The problem was clueless and dogmatic '60s worship of modernity
("newer _must_ be better, there is no exception!") being used to justify
bad architecture and planning, and the mindless destruction of anything
not fitting the fad of the moment.

-Miles

--
Sabbath, n. A weekly festival having its origin in the fact that God made the
world in six days and was arrested on the seventh.

On Sep 24, 1:40*am, Miles Bader wrote:
Bruce writes:
Thanks. *I agree. *That will be excellent.

Decent Urban Fabric 1:Concrete Commies 0

Unfortunately, the replica "Arch" would be a concrete structure.

Hmm? *It sounds like they're using a lot of the original stone (which
was recovered from a riverbed)...

Anyway, the problem is not concrete. *Concrete is a fantastic building
material, with an ancient provenance (first used extensively by the
romans!). *There are obviously many many excellent buildings made of
concrete.


I've just read a e detailed article and the replica will be steel- not
concrete-framed. It *might* incorporate some of the original stones,
but most of the cladding is likely to be some form of precast
concrete.

To add insult to injury, there will be an undeground nightclub in a
basement under the structure, and an 80+ seater restaurant at the top
level, accessed by lifts in the piers.

It might end up looking like the original but it al seems a little
tacky to me.



The problem was clueless and dogmatic '60s worship of modernity
("newer _must_ be better, there is no exception!") being used to justify
bad architecture and planning, and the mindless destruction of anything
not fitting the fad of the moment.


As it happens, the "modern" Euston is listed on account of its
architectural excellence. I like it very much and a lot of other
people do too.

The old Euston had two fine features (the Arch and the Great Hall) but
the rest of it was a disgusting smoke-filled pit that served no-one
well at all. The new Euston is an iconic building that symbolised the
"white heat of technology" of the 1960s and was far more functional
than what it replaced.

It wasn't possible to incorporate wither the Great Hall or the Arch in
their original positions, however the Arch could have been relocated
had the will been there. Sadly, it wasn't.

In my opinion, the new steel structure, clad in Lord knows what, will
be something of an insult to the designer of the original - Thomas
Hardwicke - and the craftsmen who built it. Instead of something that
respects the original, it merely apes it, while housing businesses
that were never intended to feature in the original structure.

There is perhaps no better definition than "bad architecture and
planning, and the mindless construction of anything fitting the fad of
the moment" while insulting the original. Don't you agree?

Bruce writes:
In my opinion, the new steel structure, clad in Lord knows what, will
be something of an insult to the designer of the original - Thomas
Hardwicke - and the craftsmen who built it. Instead of something that
respects the original, it merely apes it, while housing businesses
that were never intended to feature in the original structure.

There is perhaps no better definition than "bad architecture and
planning, and the mindless construction of anything fitting the fad of
the moment" while insulting the original. Don't you agree?

It's hard to say really; details matter a _lot_. Certainly there's
nothing inherently wrong with housing different businesses, or using
different materials.

-Miles

--
Friendship, n. A ship big enough to carry two in fair weather, but only one
in foul.