Well, this is rapidly turning into Property Week, isn't it?A reader has pointed me in the direction of Stourbridge architects BBLB's website where you can see full details of the forthcoming London Array fart farm's control and maintenance building which they've designed for our lovely port here in the Ms' P. Click on the pic to read and see more.
The new building is apparently designed to BREEAM Excellent, whatever the fudge that is. Perhaps it's related to the monster bass!
24 comments:
I've not seen a planning application for this. Does anyone have any details?
anon again!
As if the ugliness of the Port Buildings aint bad enuff, we have to suffer with another Turner Contempo in Ramsgate-on-Sea.
This will only see off more visitors from a beautiful town.
Why do we let things happen at halfway the quality they should be?
What is wrong with a well designed classic built brick building?
NO MORE PORTA CABINS spoiling the view PLEASE!!!
I like it. It is what a control and maintenance building should look like. It makes a statement.
None of the port area is particularly pleasing to the eye is it, no harm in this being built there. As for the slipway building in the harbour though, that is a different matter altogether!
cheapest opption always wins with this council
cheapest opption always wins with this council it dont look that bad its not a palace
At least the new building was finished and can be used for its intended purpose - not always so straightforward as it might seem in Thanet
Absolutely disgusting. They need to give it multi-pane windows and a wrought-iron fence to be in keeping with the Georgian houses on the cliff-top.
I assume by leaving such features out they were planning to avoid draughts and noise nuisance and maybe even to provide screening of electromagnetic pollution.
If only Thor and Sericol had applied the same standards eh ?
This should please our waste of space teeny tiny council.
Thinking of our architectural wonders what's going to happen to the murderous walkway?
There is a case for functional buildings designed for their time and purpose but not posterity. It is not a cathedral but a place of work that can cheaply be replaced and updated as technology advances.
Of course, one could make the same case for schools now so that, instead of investing millions in rebuilds, one provides cheap functional units designed to be replaced as needs change.
At the moment debate is all too frequently divided between the retention of classic fascades in brick or stone buildings and the 'so called' state of the art greenhouses beloved by the Guardianista. There is a middle way, cheaper and more short term functional. Everything does not have to last centuries.
Of course, one could make the same case for schools now so that, instead of investing millions in rebuilds, one provides cheap functional units designed to be replaced as needs change.
Yes folks, now the Tories are in again, it's back to Portakabins!
Many of the UK schools are functional buildings that were put in the 1960's - that's why they now need replacing :-).
A problem for some schools now is that they won't be.
Sadly, Gerald, they were not functional buildings but somewhere between the classic brick and tile and the glasshouse effect. They were intended as long term but do not match the building to last quality of earlier eras nor the truly functional modern approach.
A functional building can today be light, warm and, even, environmentally friendly yet equipped with every modern teaching aid. Not a Portakabin, Richard, but a building designed for its purposes and easily replaced or updated as needed.
Technology has advanced well beyond bricks and mortar so why not use it. We really cannot go on rebuilding schools, hospitals and other public buildings at enormous cost every few years in the old fashioned way.
Sorry. Posh Portakabins then!
Form following function. At least it doesn't pretend to be anything else unlike some of the horrors at Westwood Angry. Seems copying the Crystal Palace style (no, not the team silly) is over.
westwood cross was badly layed out should have been a smaller version of blue water all under cover
3:44 PM Could not agree more about Westwood Cross. What a criminal waste of land when it could have so easily been a multi-storey, fully covered shopping centre giving more shop floor space on a smaller plot and greater comfort for the shopper. The present design, with the slightly over hung avenue of shops, is a natural vortex attracting every bit of wind going.
What colour TDC administration approved the plans for the horror we have?
Red?
And the colour of the group responsible for considering the harbour glasshouse? Where does the Ramsgate Society fit into all this? In Faversham their society has an influence on development, good or bad. And on another note what happened to the guts of the Camera Obscura that used to sit on the west pier.A lovely piece of magic with no carbon emissions and real appeal. Not high tech enough for modern yoof?
9.19 sold off knowing the money crabbers at tdc
In reply to Gerald's first comment the "new" port is apparently Crown Estates land and no planning permission is requiredm, only consent from HRM.
where is the contest to complete the phrase "more building shite approved by....." ?
New building ? blar blar blar they (TDC) can not keep the old buildings open the ladies toilet has been closed for for three weeks when we asked where the ladies should go we was told to use the toilet on the other side of the harbour by the time it takes to get there and back the older ladies will want to go again. perhaps they should use the toilets in the nice warm harbour offices? which is about half way.
Post a Comment