The London landmark narrowly saved from demolition.. meanwhile

[-:Undertaker:-]

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/arti...storation.html

Is this the most beautiful hotel in the world? First look at stunning London landmark after £150m restoration and a brush with the bulldozers

For years it has stood empty, its echoing corridors and soaring arches crumbling gently to dust. But the hotel Sir John Betjeman once described as 'too beautiful to survive' has now been restored to its former gothic glory - twinned, of course, with the super-slick accoutrements of 21st century travel. St Pancras Renaissance - formerly the Midland Grand - is already an iconic London landmark, a fairytale fantasy of redbrick and turrets overlooking one of the world's great stations.

Add to this a £150million decade-long transformation, a restaurant run by one of Britain's top chefs plus an in-house spa, and you've got the makings of something rather special. The hotel will officially open on May 5, 138 years to the day since it threw open its glamorous halls to an awe-struck public for the first time. It was built by Sir George Gilbert Scott, the leading Victorian architect whose signature style was gothic revival at its most lavish. He created a labyrinth of sumptuous colour characterised by an obsessive attention to detail.

Tragically, the original incarnation of the hotel only last for 62 years before closing in 1935. It was then converted into offices and was only saved from demolition by the intervention of Betjeman and protests from a public very attached to the hotel's distinctive edifice. But the victory was a temporary respite. In 1988, it was abandoned, the doors shut on the golden age of railways and their palatial hotels.

Languishing in a derelict hinterland, it seemed only a matter of time before the bulldozers once again loomed large for the Midland Grand. Then a minor miracle happened in the unlikely shape of Eurostar. By 2000 plans were afoot to transform the now dingy station to its former glory with continental trains relocated from Waterloo. The Midland Grand would also be restored. An army of craftsmen and painters moved in, recreating gold-leaf ceilings, ornate wall murals and the spectacular grand staircase. The Manhattan Loft Corporation, which is responsible for the renovation, has also kept many of the hotel's historic features intact, including the Ladies Smoking Room, the first place where it was acceptable for women to light up in public. But there have been some changes. Many of the hotel's rooms are housed in an extension tacked on to the property.

Now compare that with this..

'The orbit': work has already started in preparation for 2012

A nice story, a beautiful building saved (as it should be) when many of its brothers/sisters are no longer here thanks to the massacre of the 1960s when we demolished thousands of buildings just like St Pancras and replaced them with ugly concrete and glass structures, many of which are also now gone due to the fact they were not only built to a poor standard.. they dated within years.

Which brings in 'the orbit' which is being built in London right now, I don't know about you - but wouldn't it be nice if we spent that money on building another building worthy of St Pancras or indeed restored buildings which are in the same league as St Pancras... have we gone backwards or forwards, you decide.

Thoughts on the Pancras station/the Orbit building? will the Orbit be a 'Eiffel Tower' for London?

[Mathew]

There is going to be so much cringeworthy hype for this "Orbit"..... building? (albeit looks more like a contraption) and it will most likely end up being a flop, forgotten about after the Olympics.

You know, on one hand I'm all for progress, future, modern art and letting go of the past... but the Orbit structure seems to be just one step too far for me; almost like we're trying too hard to impress. Maybe it's just my old-fashioned, sterotypical view of our country.. but I do prefer to see the United Kingdom with magnificent old, well built structures like St. Pancras, this hotel... and.. if I daresay, the Houses of Parliament. They seem so British and do our country so much justice. Perhaps they are more iconic than anything, and sadly the Orbit structure can't fill those shoes, imo.

[Technologic]

these older buildings have a crappy infrastructure thats why companies tend to avoid them and move to/build new buildings

The Shard London Bridge is a brand new, modern skyscraper which will look awesome.

[-:Undertaker:-]

Older buildings are very well built, hence why even the lowest quality victorian buildings such as terraces are still standing whereas 1960s/70s/80s housing is all but consigned to the dustbin. The only problem is that most of the older buildings were designed for other purposes which means they have to be converted. The Shard has nothing about it, it will look just as the 60s/70s/80s buildings look today in 20 years or so - nothing to them.

With the building techniques we have now, we should be able to build buildings like St Pancras in a shorter amount of time and for lesser price tag. But no, we'd rather build out-of-place buildings such as the Shard which could be built in any part of the world and there's nothing unique to them.

But it comes down to personal taste I guess, the Shard (compared to other modern buildings) isn't that bad i'll give it that.

[Technologic]

Older buildings are very well built, hence why even the lowest quality victorian buildings such as terraces are still standing whereas 1960s/70s/80s housing is all but consigned to the dustbin. The only problem is that most of the older buildings were designed for other purposes which means they have to be converted. The Shard has nothing about it, it will look just as the 60s/70s/80s buildings look today in 20 years or so - nothing to them.

With the building techniques we have now, we should be able to build buildings like St Pancras in a shorter amount of time and for lesser price tag.

The issue is though the buildings simply don't have the space to install network cabling and the such, the walls are solid brick and part of the integral structure so it's very difficult for companies to get around this. In Manchester the Refuge Assurance building used to house the company of the same name but they moved to a brand new building in wilmslow simply because the layout and infrastructure was not good enough. I'm all for saving the buildings but it's a matter of cost that is the problem

[Eoin247]

I made a thread in this section about "the orbit" last year and it seems that the majority of people on here dislike it. Unless the actual monument looks a hell of a lot better than the virtual image one, then i don't know what people in their right mind would actualy go through with building this.

I remember somebody describing it to me as the Eiffel tower without viagra,

[Inseriousity.]

This is the "abstract" Temenos... thing in Middlesbrough that looks absolutely ridiculous! I can't remember what it cost but as Middlesbrough is not exactly a thriving town, it was a complete waste of money! It is surely saying something when "the orbit" looks better sigh

[Conservative,]

I personally like the Shard (having seen it go up since day 1), but I think a lot of ugly buildings exist compared to beautiful like this one you've posted Dan.

The problem is, cost & function. Cost - what does it cost to run a newly built, low-cost, eco-friendly building Vs. an old victorian building? Probably quite a big difference. And function - old victorian buildings rarely have suitable layout for offices etc. So they are not useful and get knocked down. It's sad but true.

[Jordy]

It's Apples and Oranges really, the Orbit is a tourist attraction whilst the other is a Hotel. Regardless of this though I agree with your point, the orbit looks a complete mess and is "modern art" at it's utter worst, whilst the St Pancras hotel looks magnificent. I'm a big fan of the St Pancras station tbh, it's absolutely fantastic, it's the perfect bridge between modern and victorian architecture, probably my favourite building...

The hotel accompanies it well

Whilst The Shard looks a decent building, it looks out of place. It'll stick out on the skyline far too much seeing as it's far taller than anything nearby. Reminds me of the ridiculous skyscraper in Dubai;



It's not quite as bad as this but still...

Show Hide

[GommeInc]

The issue is though the buildings simply don't have the space to install network cabling and the such, the walls are solid brick and part of the integral structure so it's very difficult for companies to get around this. In Manchester the Refuge Assurance building used to house the company of the same name but they moved to a brand new building in wilmslow simply because the layout and infrastructure was not good enough. I'm all for saving the buildings but it's a matter of cost that is the problem

A good point too. Many of these buildings which are "modernised" to have WiFi and electrics fitted look dreadful with cables running up and down the walls That said, when electricity became popular they used metal trunking to hide the cables, not this awful plastic trenching which is square and off putting A hospital near where I live was saved (they bulldozed the old morgue behind it instead) and you can see it's been around longer than electricity, with all the cables and pipe work on the outside of the walls - it's done quite nicely though, but the waiting rooms and consultation rooms are a bit mix and match - some are too big, while others too small or connected to other rooms making it difficult to have any privacy.

This is a beautiful building It reminds me of either the Victoria and Albert Museum in London, or one of the other museums found near by. It's amazing how much of a presence they have, unlike a few modern buildings that are just wire frames with glass hanging off the side Can't wait to see the Shard though, and how it contrasts with the rest of London.