Lost London

[Langur]

image hosted on flickr

[citybus]

Originally Posted by El_Greco

Dont forget it was cheap too.

This is a bit of a misconception. Some modernist buildings were expensive to produce. Tower blocks fit this bill- their complex plumbing and wiring systems were much more pricey to install up high than in traditional housing. The only reason these type of estates were cheap to build was because central government subsidised buildings over a certain height. Though over the years it cost a fucking fortune to keep on repairing the lifts and to fix the communal areas that two storey houses don't have. And of course a lot of councils were too miserly to pay for this.

Another myth is that high rise equals high density. If you put a few isolated tower blocks in a glorified park then you'll end up housing a lot less people than the slum housing that was replaced. Saying that the vast majority of council flats in London are medium rise anyway.

[WallyChops]

Originally Posted by Light Parade

there's a nice model of the Lansbury Shopping Precinct here: http://www.retronaut.co/2012/05/maps...-britain-1951/.

There's some nice photo's on there I hadn't seen before. The first one attached is a 1924 view of Fleet Street looking towards St Pauls (from the Alfred Kahn collection) - it's probably a Sunday, but its amazing how uncluttered the street is for what was such a busy thoroughfare. The second is a 1957 view from St Pauls of Cannon Street.

[The Champ]

The remains of St Mildred Bread Street, a Wren church, just visible behind the Bracken House construction

[TedStriker]

The retronaut site is fantastic!

[Mr Bricks]

When it comes to clutter and street furniture this should be the norm:

[El_Greco]

Absolutely, and look no yellow lines either!

[ill tonkso]

Indeed, or stupid signs. No trees though. It should be Trees, Decent Lamp Posts, Bollards when strictly necessary and Tram Poles (though they should be linked to Lamp Posts if they can) and that is it.

I am also a sucker for Lamp Post Flags when done properly (i.e. not cheap tacky plastic shite).

Incidentally Greco, since when were me and you on the same page? This seems to be happening a lot lately

[WallyChops]

[QUOTE=WallyChops;90340788]Warsaw1948's (http://www.flickr.com/photos/5908209...n/photostream/) sets on Flickr are well worth a look.

There's many more photo's of Charing Cross Road on Warsaw1948's excellent Flickr collection. It shows how intact St Giles Circus was before before Centre Point was placed onto it. (http://www.flickr.com/photos/5908209...th/6778215900/).





And from the Charing Cross side: -



Having seen the recent changes, I get the feeling very few lessons have been learned.

[Light Parade]

http://film.britishcouncil.org/london-terminus

Plenty of London-in-the-1940s films at this site.

John Somers was a handsome building - thanks for the St Giles photos, WallyChops.

[Langur]

Originally Posted by Mr Bricks

When it comes to clutter and street furniture this should be the norm:

That's absurdly unrealistic. This is a photo in which there's no sign of anything from the 20th or 21st centuries. You and El Greco seem to be retreating into a fantasyland of yesteryear. Some of us actually love the busy exciting London of today.

[Sweet Zombie Jesus]

Busy and exciting comes from how people use the city streets, and does not have to mean ugly street clutter.

[Langur]

If you want zero clutter, colour, and modernity, go to a small village or quiet suburb somewhere. It's not realistic for busy parts of London or indeed any other modern city.

[WallyChops]

Originally Posted by Langur

If you want zero clutter, colour, and modernity, go to a small village or quiet suburb somewhere. It's not realistic for busy parts of London or indeed any other modern city.

It certainly not an issue exclusive to modern cities - I live in a small, quiet village and the streets/pavements are clogged with highways clutter - probably worse than in London.

There's no reason why we can't have streetscapes in the 21st century that are still busy and vibrant, but with less unnecessary clutter. Thankfully, awareness of the issue and possible alternatives is growing - we just have to wait for planning and highways authorities to catch up.

[NCT]

In the olden days trams would just stop in the middle of the road, which would be absolutely unacceptable today, so at least bus-stop boxes are here to say. Roads are saturated with traffic, and I'm afraid you will need to have legally clear restrictions on parking and loading, which means clear road markings and signs, otherwise you are inviting chaos and lawers would be laughing their heads off. Short of hiking taxes on vehicle ownership or banning vehicles outright you can't really legislate vehicle use without some markings and signs. Would people rather have cars double parked all over the place honking everywhere, residents fighting with shoppers over parking spaces in exchange for not having lines and poles? Or is that the kind of vibrancy people are talking about?

[El_Greco]

Originally Posted by Langur

Some of us actually love the busy exciting London of today.

Oh yeah thats truly exciting!





Even the government acknowledges that clutter is a problem -

"concerned that the character of the England's towns and villages is being damaged by a proliferation of signs, bollards and advertising hoardings"

"There are loads of traffic lights here, street lamps, bike racks, benches, plenty of bins and bollards just everywhere."

"said a "disgusting array of signs" clustered together were a national disgrace.""

"Plans to improve the "jungle of signs" on Britain's roads"

http://news.bbc.co.uk/local/sheffiel...00/8946658.stm

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-england...shire-13681886

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-15299597

[NCT]

Yes some joined up thinking is required, and that double lamp-post sure is foolish. Signs can be rationalised quite a bit, but most will stay. However some of the comments are just confused. Talking about street lamps, bike racks and bins - so you'd rather walk in darkness, have nowhere to park your bike and leave rubbish?

[El_Greco]

Thats not what it says and you know it.

[Mr Bricks]

Originally Posted by Langur

That's absurdly unrealistic. This is a photo in which there's no sign of anything from the 20th or 21st centuries. You and El Greco seem to be retreating into a fantasyland of yesteryear. Some of us actually love the busy exciting London of today.

It is not. I've seen it in many cities. There is no reason to have a jungle of signs and traffic lights, railings, painted tarmac, traffic islands and tacky plastic traffic bollards. If yo think this is what makes a city exciting I feel sorry for you.

[Langur]

Originally Posted by Langur

That's absurdly unrealistic. This is a photo in which there's no sign of anything from the 20th or 21st centuries. You and El Greco seem to be retreating into a fantasyland of yesteryear. Some of us actually love the busy exciting London of today.

Actually I'm wrong. There is one sign of the 20th or 21st centuries: the nice smooth tarmac.