Oh and a quick addendum for those people who actually live in the area who are interested in the wider impacts - there's the beginnings of a really interesting discussion over at UpMyStreet.

→ Posted by: Tom Coates at June 7, 2003 3:09 PM

I'm by no means a Prince Charles type, fervently railing against any modern architecture - but on first glance that proposed building looks absolutely *awful*! Why do they want to put what looks like some sort of glass and steel monstrosity in the centre of Camden Town, where it will fit aesthetically about as well if you dumped a small portakabin in the middle of Stonehenge? Ugh.

→ Posted by: Vaughan at June 7, 2003 3:34 PM

If it means not having to fear catching the plague when travelling to Camden, then all the better. Filthy, filthy place, even for the Northern Line. More of a shame is losing the goth-tastic electric ballroom.

→ Posted by: paulpod at June 7, 2003 5:42 PM

That's certainly true - but I suppose my more general question remains - should they have tried to preserve some of the facade of the old underground in some way, or is that just nostalgia?

→ Posted by: Tom Coates at June 7, 2003 5:44 PM

I guess they should... renewing the space without killing the classic station entrance would be a nice move.
There's a new apartment complex in Lisbon, where there used to be a very old, and well known, factory. They kept the original factory facade up to the 2rd floor, building in glass a modern structure from there. It looks prefectly normal from ground, and better when looked from above.

And about Camden, that building seems way to modern to fit on that environment. Hope it's just the CG giving that impression.

→ Posted by: Dave at June 7, 2003 11:01 PM

To tell you the truth, I think people will just be happy to see the station in full use!

→ Posted by: Dave at June 8, 2003 12:39 AM

I think it's possible to meld modern architecture and technology with more traditional and historic styles - and I'm very surprised that more designers and architects don't try to do this. For example, my university has buildings dating back to the 1860's - really old and beautiful limestone buildings. However, all new buildings are still built in the same style, using the same limestone. Sure they look newer and more modern, but they maintain a certain consistancy with all the other buildings in the area that really makes the campus looks beautiful. Urban planners take note.

→ Posted by: Bryan at June 8, 2003 1:46 AM

I think what I meant to point out is that Camden is not a particularly nice place - never has been. The fact that it has some "old" functional, semi-industrial architecture doesn't really mean much, and London, England even more-so has to realise that keeping things for the sake of keeping them, old or otherwise is not always the best avenue. Especially tube stations, which to be frank should be invisible anyway, or at the least, well signposted holes in the ground!

→ Posted by: paulpod at June 8, 2003 3:16 AM

Paulpod: hopefully not everyone think that of subway stations, otherwise the Paris subways and its beautiful Guimard's 1900 entrances would be destroyed by now. But may be that explains why the London subway (compared to Paris) is an underground nightmare.

Tom: if enough people are able to see and articulate what existing elements in the present building constitute a part of the local identity, then you have something more constructive than nostalgia or "the new buidling is ugly" complainst, which do not really help. More on this here.

→ Posted by: François at June 8, 2003 11:50 AM

I'm with paulpod on this one-- Camden is not a very aesthetically pleasing area as it is now, so I can't imagine that this new facade will do any harm.

It also might provide a reason to visit the area that doesn't involve shopping for: (a) a bong, (b) a tattoo, or (c) teak.

→ Posted by: AR at June 8, 2003 2:35 PM

I think Parkway is nice, and it's nice up around the canal/river. And even the bits that aren't pretty still have a pretty clear character to them. I don't think anyone doubts that Camden needs some work done it to make it a good place to live and work and visit again. I suppose the question is - is this the right way to do it...

→ Posted by: Tom Coates at June 8, 2003 2:51 PM

Why not speak to CABE (www.cabe.org.uk). I'm sure they would be interested in getting an opportunity to comment on the planning application, if they haven't already done so. Their Design Review comments have a *huge* influence on the ability to these sorts of schemes to get through planning.

→ Posted by: Deek at June 8, 2003 6:36 PM

Camden station was never a classic tube station for architectural reasons but always had a great emotional resonance for me that I associate in my mind with the feeling of emerging from a great big dirty hole in the ground. Stepping from the dark to the bright light at the top of the escalators (This was before I moved to London in the early 80s so I'm allowed to be romantic about it). If any tube station ever deserved to feel like it had been dug out by hand it was Camden.

It was also one of the few stations that would be staffed with ticket collectors (in the days before barriers) simply because there were so many fare dodgers getting off there. Nowadays Camden is pretty much permanently on my list of no-go places/areas along with Islington, Cafe Rouge, All Bar One (any of them) but that's another topic (and there are lots more of them).

Finally, the new proposed building looks like it's in keeping with the Camden Sainsbury's which, when it was first built, looked hugely modernistic to my mind - probably because from the pavement you could see in and watch people shopping, an activity that was usually concealed.

→ Posted by: paul at June 8, 2003 7:11 PM

Difficult one this, I am in two minds. On the one hand the proposed designs look awful. Oversized for the area and like it's been dropped on Camden from the sky by a passing plane. I also love the red brick underground stations as they are part of an interesting history of the London Underground.

On the other hand... preserving a city's identity is a difficult one. A huge proprtian of London is taken up with Victorian buildings, but we are not the Victorians. Where is our identity? If we fight to preserve everything, what mark will our generations be making for the future? It doesn't mean we should destroy everything from the past but we shouldn't be so afraid to take a stand. If Gaudi hadn't made any bold moves for example, Barcelona would be alot less interesting architecturally. We can still design for the present, while respecting the past.

→ Posted by: Denise at June 8, 2003 10:51 PM

I believe that the designs for the new station are awful. I know that the station has to be redeveloped because the ticket hall area and access to the platforms are far from good, but this seems to have been considered as only equally important as the potential commercial benefits of being able to add office space above the station.

The new design does not even remotely fit in with the rest of Camden High Street, Chalk Farm Road, Kentish Town Road or Camden Road and will, as you can see, dwarf the other surrounding buildings. I agree that the station is hardly a classic example of tube architecture but if the designers are set on replacing it, then surely something more keeping with the area would be better than this attempt to bring Canary Wharf-style design to Camden, irrespective of whether it fits with the area.

The current station is far from perfect, but at least it has character, which this bland, uninspired new design signally fails to achieve. I'd prefer something a little less 'high-rise-out-of-the-box'.

→ Posted by: Mark at June 9, 2003 1:28 PM

I think it is an absolute disgrace that Camden tube station is being redeveloped into that monstrosity of a building. London will soon turn into one of those cities which has absolutely no individuality or character.I cannot comment on the state of the actual transport system itself and i understand that if a new station must be built then so be it but Camden of all places does not need a station that would look dull in the heart of Milton Keynes.People live and travel to Camden because it is Camden.It has its own character and atmosphere. The plans for the new station would defeat the whole point of its own existence.Knocking down the Electric Ballroom is another disgrace.It is a landmark in the heart of Camden which has stood for many years and been the venue for many an important band.Perhaps we could replace it with a sign that reads-"we are capitalist pigs who discourage anything to do with culture,inspiration,individuality,freedom of thought,personality,optimism etc.We are dull heartless humans and you shall do whatever we tell you to do."

→ Posted by: James Fraser at August 29, 2003 11:03 AM

I generally have to agree with people that the building is totally out of keeping with the character and appearence of the area.. however i am probably biased as i always lean towards historic architecture and have a love for old buildings. i suggest some sort of peoples revolt because no amount of web-chat without direct action will change the fact that they are the plans, thats what the building will look like because the powers that be have made their decision. stop talking..start acting.

→ Posted by: alix at February 4, 2004 3:59 PM

no comments...

→ Posted by: Vomitory at September 4, 2006 3:43 AM