The "much loved" Astoria is in really bad state and shadow of the
former self - not much regret here (from a regular visitor).

In message
, at
03:50:23 on Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Alex
remarked:
The "much loved" Astoria is in really bad state and shadow of the
former self - not much regret here (from a regular visitor).

Is it suffering from planning blight though?
--
Roland Perry

On Mon, Oct 06, 2008 at 12:17:46PM +0100, Roland Perry wrote:
on Mon, 6 Oct 2008, Alex
remarked:
The "much loved" Astoria is in really bad state and shadow of the
former self - not much regret here (from a regular visitor).
Is it suffering from planning blight though?

No, it's been a hole for years.

--
David Cantrell | London Perl Mongers Deputy Chief Heretic

All praise the Sun God
For He is a Fun God
Ra Ra Ra!

On Sat, Oct 04, 2008 at 06:27:32AM -0700, lonelytraveller wrote:

I can't think of a single other project that's so deliberately
destructive of london's history; there was no need to destroy the much
loved Astoria ...

The Astoria is a ****-hole. The only thing wrong with demolishing it is
that when its replacement is built (for yes, the plans are to build a
replacement as part of the Crossrail station) it will be an equally
hideous corporate theatre ****-hole.

--
David Cantrell | top google result for "internet beard fetish club"

Googling for "Swedish lizard overlord" gives
this sig as the first result.

WHAT DOES THAT TELL YOU, EH? EH?

On Oct 4, 2:27 pm, lonelytraveller
wrote:
loved Astoria when they could demolish the much despised Centrepoint;

I quite like centrepoint. As far as 60s/70s towers go its one of the
better ones.

B2003

On Oct 6, 4:35*pm, Boltar wrote:
On Oct 4, 2:27 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
loved Astoria when they could demolish the much despised Centrepoint;

I quite like centrepoint. As far as 60s/70s towers go its one of the
better ones.

The tower isn't the thing on my mind every time my mind boggles yet
again at the attitudes that must have prevailed in so many minds and
institutions at the same time when a whole block was built in the
centre of a city without a pavement to walk on.

MIG wrote:
On Oct 6, 4:35 pm, Boltar wrote:
On Oct 4, 2:27 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
loved Astoria when they could demolish the much despised Centrepoint;
I quite like centrepoint. As far as 60s/70s towers go its one of the
better ones.

The tower isn't the thing on my mind every time my mind boggles yet
again at the attitudes that must have prevailed in so many minds and
institutions at the same time when a whole block was built in the
centre of a city without a pavement to walk on.

Didn't the mindset go:

1) The USA is wonderful
2) No one walks in the USA
3) Ergo no provision for pedestrians is wonderful.

A lot of modern buildings on TCR northbound are set back, indicating a
desire at some point to widen the street, which may have contributed to
the lack of pedestrian access.

A study of changing attitudes to the USA over the last sixty years is
instructive - my grandad, who was Irish from the generation that still
saw emigration westwards as something that happened to extra good boys,
thought gold grew out of the streets there. My Dad grew up at the time
of Vietnam and has a substantially more jaundiced view. I, growing up
in the 1980s, think it's a nice place to visit but as a country it's
nothing special and could do with a tidy up and a lick of paint. Much
prefer European cities like Brussels, personally.

Tom

On Oct 8, 12:32*pm, Tom Barry wrote:
MIG wrote:
On Oct 6, 4:35 pm, Boltar wrote:
On Oct 4, 2:27 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
loved Astoria when they could demolish the much despised Centrepoint;
I quite like centrepoint. As far as 60s/70s towers go its one of the
better ones.

The tower isn't the thing on my mind every time my mind boggles yet
again at the attitudes that must have prevailed in so many minds and
institutions at the same time when a whole block was built in the
centre of a city without a pavement to walk on.

Didn't the mindset go:

1) The USA is wonderful
2) No one walks in the USA
3) Ergo no provision for pedestrians is wonderful.

A lot of modern buildings on TCR northbound are set back, indicating a
desire at some point to widen the street, which may have contributed to
the lack of pedestrian access.

A study of changing attitudes to the USA over the last sixty years is
instructive - my grandad, who was Irish from the generation that still
saw emigration westwards as something that happened to extra good boys,
thought gold grew out of the streets there. *My Dad grew up at the time
of Vietnam and has a substantially more jaundiced view. *I, growing up
in the 1980s, think it's a nice place to visit but as a country it's
nothing special and could do with a tidy up and a lick of paint. *Much
prefer European cities like Brussels, personally.

I rather like Cardiff. A pity Crossrail won't go that far (dragging
it back to the thread).

"MIG" wrote in message
...
On Oct 6, 4:35 pm, Boltar wrote:
On Oct 4, 2:27 pm, lonelytraveller

wrote:
loved Astoria when they could demolish the much despised
Centrepoint;

I quite like centrepoint. As far as 60s/70s towers go its one of
the
better ones.

The tower isn't the thing on my mind every time my mind boggles yet
again at the attitudes that must have prevailed in so many minds and
institutions at the same time when a whole block was built in the
centre of a city without a pavement to walk on.

There is a pavement to walk on. It was assumed that the Barbican
"highwalks" would have spread all across London

We got five ring roads from the planner kings (or at least a partial
try)
And Jubilee and Victoria in their halls of stone
No highwalks for pedestrians, still doomed to die
No Orbrail then for railways, who once ruled the throne.
But there's one mode that rules them all, although they won't admit
it.
For fast, fun trips around our town, ride a bike, you won't regret
it.

Jeremy Parker