Surrey Canal regeneration - new images released

The team behind the Surrey Canal regeneration project (30 acres of Lewisham, surrounding The New Den) have released new images and a little more information about the project, as part of their public consultation.

The site now includes some implausible-looking renderings, which have been given the I Am Legend treatment, with lush vegetation sprouting from every pore of every building. The architecture is pretty lurid too, but these will only be concept designs at this stage.

If all proceeds according to plan, work should begin in 2012 and be completed over the next 10 years.

17 comments:

Name said...

Good to see trees in the images. That area is in need of some green.

Headhunter said...

"....given the I Am Legend treatment, with lush vegetation sprouting from every pore of every building."

That made me laugh! Cynical about the sporting village are we?

Brockley Nick said...

Well honestly, I am normally prepared to give developers a lot more benefit of the doubt than most would, but those are ridiculous :)

lb said...

Green walls are no fiction - look at Patrick Blanc's work in Paris. Visionary stuff. See also R&Sie's Lost in Paris House.

We British are architectural Neanderthals compared to the French, who have no problem with either modern architecture or large-scale public projects.

Danja said...

I can't see any green walls. I can see a New New Forest on the roof.

Brockley Nick said...

Yes, I am aware of green walls, there is one closer to home, at Greenwich Peninsula.

As Danja says, the renderings don't show green walls, they show an implausible number of trees, dotted about ledges and roof lines. Not impossible of course, just highly unlikely.

lb said...

There are some definite pseudo-Blanc touches visible in some images, e.g."view of Surrey Canal from a train passing through South Bermondsey station" (from the New Homes page). Thought you might have been referring to those. I don't know whether these correspond to an actual design feature or are just oversize windowboxes dreamed up by the artist.

I know the Greenwich one - however, it's just a wall. I'd like to see London architects trying this stuff on actual buildings, instead of going for dreary corporate pap like the More London development.

Brockley Nick said...

I think there's a green wall on a hotel up by Hyde Park corner too (small one, not half as good as the ones in Paris you linked to, but still...)

mg said...

There's a whole green cube just behind Dr Johnson's House near Fleet St, I've no idea what it is as it's small compared to surrounding buildings, but nice among all the hard surfaces.
http://tinyurl.com/326kpoa

elsiemaud said...

"We British are architectural Neanderthals compared to the French, who have no problem with either modern architecture or large-scale public projects"

But half of Paris was not destroyed in the 2nd WW. They can afford to be more dramatic with their choices as they have a coplete medieval quarter - le Marais - and most of their Victorian boulvards and districts intact

Danja said...

I see what you mean LB, droopy tendrils all-round. The Russian Vine approach to greening facades.

Brockley Nick said...

Garden walls aside, I'm not sure Paris does modern better than we do.

Canary Wharf is better than La Defense, the Eye is the equal at least of the Louvre Pyramid. Lloyds is better than the Pompidou Centre, the Gherkin is far superior to Tour Montparnasse. Westfield may be a monstrosity, but it works far better than Les Halles. None of the new buildings proposed in Paris is the equal of the Shard or 122 Leadenhall. Wembley is a better stadium than Stade de France. And so on.

The centre of Paris is extraordinary but frozen in aspic.

Danja said...

And we've got Quinlan Terry

Brockley Nick said...

Indeed! And Prince Charles...

Actually don't mind QT.

lb said...

Surely if half of London was destroyed in the Blitz that means we can be even more bold? I think a bigger problem for us the fact that London's streetplan is still essentially mediaeval (although without any especially old buildings).

I also like the Pompidou Centre better than Lloyds, but that's just a personal one, I guess...

Quinlan Terry really should have been bricked up in one of his own walls several decades back. Harsh but fair, I think.

lb said...

Although that's not to say the Brits can't do the whole heritage-referencing thing with lots of style.

Tamsin said...

But only if you can spend a fortune (made, if I recall it correctly out of supplying the Victorian Civil Service with ink) and have a firm of local builders devoting the whole of their working lives to the task. I do love Castle Drogo and would recommend anyone to visit it.

The whole "pastsiche"/"referencing"/"wouldn't-good-modern-design-be-better" debate is about to kick off - rather too late in the day - with regard to the development of the Reservoir site on Jerningham Road. Postings on thehill website forums.

Personally I dislike both the Lloyds Building and the Pompidou Centre. Quite like the Gherkin and think I might like the Shard (but not what will be slammed into place around it). Paris does have the advantage of not having been bombed (but I did learn this morning that Fordham Park and Burgess Park are ex bombed out areas) and being nicely zoned - all the sky-scrapers look very elegant together in one area rather than being scattered around.

Brockley Central Label Cloud