If you could remove/change any building in London, what would it be and what would you do?

[Langur]

^ That's not true at all. The Houses of Parliament has its grandest facade facing the river. Somerset House, with it's Venetian style moorings, was an architectural wonder of the C18th, as was old Waterloo Bridge in the early C19th. Wordsworth wrote a famous poem on the beauty of the view from Westminster Bridge. Monet, Constable, and Turner were all inspired to paint the splendour of the Thames. Grand additions continued to be built along Bazelgette's Embankment throughout the C19th and C20th (and some, such as the Cecil Hotel, were destroyed). There's more riverside splendour at Greenwich. The river was the ceremonial heart of London, as the excellent Royal River exhibition at the National Maritime Museum showcases so well. Canaletto's magnificent painting is being exhibited in London for the first time...

image hosted on flickr


image hosted on flickr











Upon Westminster Bridge

Earth has not anything to show more fair:
Dull would he be of soul who could pass by
A sight so touching in its majesty:
This City now doth like a garment wear

The beauty of the morning: silent, bare,
Ships, towers, domes, theatres, and temples lie
Open unto the fields, and to the sky,
All bright and glittering in the smokeless air.

Never did sun more beautifully steep
In his first splendour valley, rock, or hill;
Ne'er saw I, never felt, a calm so deep!

The river glideth at his own sweet will:
Dear God! the very houses seem asleep;
And all that mighty heart is lying still!

Willam Wordsworth, Sept 3rd, 1802

[DarJoLe]

I'm talking about the area around the City and Bankside in the 20th century. Of course the grandeur buildings were built around what is now the west of the City, that's how London grew.

[Langur]

Scroll>>>

[cnapan]

Originally Posted by DarJoLe

Why? It's a working river that had docks and quays, and was never a tourist magnet apart from Tower Bridge and the Tower until the Festival of Britain.

Most of the buildings we're talking about were built *after* the docks and quays stopped being in business, and, in general, the most beautiful buildings along the river are those which were built while the docks were still operating.

The thing which unifies all the ugly buildings along the river is that they've all been built in the last 40 years or so - buildings which the architects at the time considered good examples, yet most of us would happily seen them torn down, and quite a few are either earmarked for 'improvement' or replacement.

The Guoman hotel is just one example. It wasn't built that way because it was just an industrial river. It was built that way because that was the type of building the architects decided was suitable as a landmark hotel on the country's most important river overlooking the city's single most recognisable landmark.

Today, this lack of regard for beauty continues. The modern replacements are less oppressive, sure, but there isn't anything about them which will make people fight for their preservation, so ultimately, they're irrelevant.

[mouldss@hotmail.co.u]

Unfortunately many of fine working river buildings are gone, all they needed was a good clean to made them look very attractive. They were demolish gradually 60s 70s 80s and 90s.

[hifive605]

The Westminster portion of the north bank is the only acceptable stretch of the riverbank. Bar a pathetic scattering of decent builds (OXO, Tate modern, few buildings beside Unilever House) the rest is a disgrace.

[TallBox]

Guomon Hotel
Central St Giles
Euston Tower
UCH
A few of the blocky groundscrapers in the City

[i_like_concrete]

Originally Posted by hifive605

The Westminster portion of the north bank is the only acceptable stretch of the riverbank. Bar a pathetic scattering of decent builds (OXO, Tate modern, few buildings beside Unilever House) the rest is a disgrace.

The bit with a dual carriageway running along it? And some of the dirtiest and unclean parts of London beneath Hungerford and Waterloo bridges? The bit that seems mainly to exist for coach parking? Give me the South Bank any day of the week, as a public space it works infinitely better than the North Bank and no matter how ugly you regard the buildings they interact with the Thames Path far better than any of the over-sized office blocks on Victoria Embankment do.

[ill tonkso]

That Leytonstone clean up posted in the streetscape thread?

That.

Nationwide.

[LazyOaf]

Guoman hotel as always. I'd also like to see the redeveloment of the red brick building on charing cross road near Cambridge circus (sandringham?). I remember redevelopment was mooted a few years ago and was vociferously opposed by local Chinese businesses, claiming it would price them out of the area. A walk though the parade a weeks ago I saw quite a few chinese businesses had closed, replaced by ubiquitous west end tourist tat shops, and a brazilian(!) restuarant. If this is the direction this stretch is going then would redevelopment still be insensitive to the cultural heritage of the area?

[levaniX]

I think those buildings of 60s-90s decade have changed Londons cityscape a lot, and somehow ruined it.(except of some cases). Unfortunately, lots of old building with some historical value were destroyed, and some tasteless commieblocks, buildings were built instead. Some specialists that those buildings actually disappointing, and make negative image about london

At least now, those modern buildings are built with taste(except of some exact cases), but though really sad to see that historical buildings are about to be destroyed

[Jamsterx]

I would redevelop the whole of the South Bank area...everytime I pass it on the train, it's depressing. I swear that the 60s and 70s must have been terrible in terms of architecture.

[DarJoLe]

The whole of the South Bank area?

[i_like_concrete]

You'd demolish one of the most successful and popular parts of London?

[ill tonkso]

With the exception of a few, most of that area is fugly. The Queen Elizabeth Gallery thingy is vile. The Festival Hall is decent, as is the Shell Centre, however the new bits of St Thomas, the buildings flanking Blackfriars Bridge (thankfully up for redev), Sea Containers and its Brutalist neighbour are hideous. Gems like Oxo Tower are surrounded by crap.

[beefykeefy]

Originally Posted by ill tonkso

With the exception of a few, most of that area is fugly. The Queen Elizabeth Gallery thingy is vile. The Festival Hall is decent, as is the Shell Centre, however the new bits of St Thomas, the buildings flanking Blackfriars Bridge (thankfully up for redev), Sea Containers and its Brutalist neighbour are hideous. Gems like Oxo Tower are surrounded by crap.

^

What he said.

[PadArch]

love the south bank

[levaniX]

Originally Posted by PadArch

love the south bank

Ive misread it as South Park

[TheWalker]

image hosted on flickr

ugly-qecc_2241024c by thewalker2012, on Flickr

[zfreeman]

I like the QEII Conference Centre.

I just think its in the wrong place given the area ..... I mean whoever decided to place it next to Westminster Abbey and Westminster Central Hall needs their head looked at.

I would have put it up by the Institute of Education on Bedford Way or out in Milton Keynes ()