McTag, I had a dead thread or two about the change in St. Pancras and maybe Walter did too, not sure, as we tend to trade or coincide in interests. I'm very interested in your take on the station.
I'll come back with a link as I suppose it's a diversion, but mainly to remember what I was wondering, back when I first read about it.
Ah, this is it, poor lame and lonely thread. (There might have been another mention, but I'm not searching further.)
http://www.able2know.org/forums/viewtopic.php?t=105469
I remember what I was wondering. It was about the color of the beams/framework... did you not even notice them (good, they shouldn't be primary), hated them, or
were all jolly re the right blue.
As a side note, Walter and I are putting all our links and questions about architectural design/building or landscape - or mostly have been - into the art forum, as much design is art.
Have been doing so for a few years, and it mostly slides by unnoticed. Just today I'm trying not to be the only one considering the ASLA landarch awards.
My own interest is to get people looking, and commenting, and not thinking the world around us is some kind of present from outer space.
I want to know what you would do differently, given the design problem.
If you don't want that designed, I might not mind, but could you be fairly specific, and not just swearing, vituperative?
From my view, site design has devolved to some large extent by the will of site developers, which is often, if not always, aimed at profit, for lots of understandable reasons, but sometimes decimating to the land and people. Not always, seemingly, but good intentions are often over ridden.
My interest is not so much on the radical ends of that, but in what would actually work for the people who will live in the place, which might not mesh with people there decades later, and, what might work? And, no, I'm not asking for hodgepodge.
