Given the public’s opposition to the demolition of the arch at the time, the government could have compromised and agreed to carefully dismantle the arch and store it somewhere for future generations to decide what to do with it. Instead, they acted like a petulant child, demolishing and scattering it thereby making restoration extremely difficult if not impossible. For this, Macmillan et al should never be forgiven.
I disagree with Matt Brown. It should be rebuilt. The fact it’s big and gloomy will mean it perfectly frames the monstrosity behind it. I think it’s too important to history not to save.
So now Euston is to get another facelift to accommodate HS2 and the ever increasing amount of people using the station. I think there is a place for the arch in the latest plans. This is the right time to add a contrasting design to the futuristic plans for the entrance canopy. The two existing columns depicting names of towns that the station serves have looked lost and out of place since the 1960s. It seems that the foot print of the station cannot accommodate the 21st century footfall therefore I suggest platforms should be built underground.
Would you be happy rebuilding it not in stone but a modern material even fibreglass? The stones they have found could be incorporated into a new build, even for the foundations only.
The Euston Arch should never have been destroyed, but neither should the Great Hall, both structures and contents were exceptional pieces of historical architecture. The 1960s was the worst decade for the destruction of so many amazing railway buildings and viaducts, all supposedly in the name of progress.
So right, and now th world is richer and more able, our corrupt rulers should be made to replace what they stole from us brick by brick, building by building and street by street, combining the best hand-made or 3d-machined masonry exterior facades and period interior deco with the latest building components materials/techniques. There are plenty of buildings like this in the City of London and elsewhere in the country. Liverpool Street Station was not the worst attempt, either.
Edwin Leslie because architects are taught how to use precisely three materials, Concrete Steel and glass. They are cheap but can only make rectangles but did I mention they’re CHEAP I think that may have something to do with it
There were huge protests by the public, politicians & noteworthy people, but British Rail stood firm. One of many forms of "modernisation" in the '60s.
