Warehouse where London’s Burning was shot

Join in these discussions today! Log in or register.
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2
Thursday 12 March 2009 9.55pm
Warehouse where London's burning was shot or so a commentary on a boat trip said.(on my way to the Angel Pub I notice its gone now)
It looked very much like a post war building, but unfortunately the glass buildings planned
Have no docklands feel at all. Also apparently the water was right up to the boards on the balcony today.
And I must say the view from there is exquisite
Thursday 12 March 2009 10.20pm
You mean Chambers Wharf I assume Micky?

Being keen on industrial architecture I was a fan of the existing buildings but the new scheme opens up the Thames Path and whilst they are not tremendously exciting architecturally they will bring new life to the eastern end of Chambers Street which currently feels a bit of a dead area. A good thing surely?

Are we to expect another of your rants against any new development in London? ;-)
Friday 13 March 2009 12.47am
The Thames path is one thing more, glass buildings we don't need.
Friday 13 March 2009 8.23am
I presume then Micky that you went along to the extremely well publicised planning exhibition for this scheme and made your views known?

Or could it be yet another of your rather tiring knee jerk reactions to any new development around the area. Do you actually like any modern buildings or indeed progress itself?
Friday 13 March 2009 12.56pm
Most of my comments on here have been about the pottersfirld development , that doesn't constitute knee-jerk reacting to any new development,

Like you I also like industrial architecture, but unlike you in this case I choose to defend what I like.

Many on this message board have expressed the view that any new development doesn't constitute progress.
A view with which I agree.
Friday 13 March 2009 3.28pm
I totally agree that new developments do not necessarily constitute progress however the overly simplistic argument that glass = bad, tall = bad and new = bad is banded around rather too freely for my liking, is the gherkin not a glass building? It seems strange that if you feel so strongly about a scheme that you only pipe up about it once the buildings have been demolished and after several planning exhibitions that have been well publicised on these forums.

I was actually against the Chambers Wharf scheme before I went to the planning exhibition but having studied the plans in detail I felt that overall the net gain of opening up the Thames Path and regenerating what feels like a very dead area outweighed the loss of the existing buildings which, much as I liked them, were a bit of an acquired taste architecturally.
Friday 13 March 2009 4.04pm
the overly simplistic argument that glass = bad, tall = bad and new = bad


You're the only person to use that argument. So far
Its nearly as bad as that word regeneration.
For the docklands I do think glass in larg amounts is a bit of a killer. Though
Sunday 15 March 2009 12.49pm
Also on the subject of the Thames path the characteristic of the docklands is that the warehouses front on to the river and the path is behind with opportunities to see the river in-between via gaps for moorings and stairs leading down to the Forshaw . that's what makes it interesting. I'm not interested in paths on the waterfront at the expense of warehouse buildings.
Monday 16 March 2009 9.43am
I think you are in the tiny minority then mickysalt. The opening up of the Thames path has liberated the south bank. So you would really prefer they had just kept those 2 huge lumps of inaccessible concrete, with metal fencing blocking off the Thames?? When it finished you'll have great contrast between old and new all down the south bank; Bankside leading into More London leading into Shad Thames leading into Chambers Wharf leading into Rotherhide village. For me, thats a perfect city...
Pages:  1 2 Next
Current: 1 of 2

To post a message, please log in or register..

Keep up with SE1 news

We have three email newsletters for you to choose from: