Back in 1967 the chairman of the borough planning authority (Alderman Freeman) spoke about the proposed new Barclays Bank building in the Market Place.
Justifying their approval of plans for the new building he said "some members view it with absolute horror, but three experts we have consulted think it absolutely first class." and "We are told that in a few years time we shall look back on this an say it is the finest building to be erected in Newbury in post-war years."
Well, a fair few years have passed and Barclays are soon to vacate the building. Is it as good as the experts said? Or would you prefer to see it replaced with a more traditional building? Or an ultra modern design?
Perhaps as it was a Post Office building they didn't have any choice.
I think it is a common understanding that the post office tower is probably the ugliest modern building in the south of England. It's made even worse by the proliferation of aerials on top. I wonder if they all obtained planning permission.
Barclay's bank is not that bad for a town centre business building. Some thought has gone into the design to make it a little softer and as already has been said, the roofline is in keeping.
There are a further two very bland, modern buildings in town, which are far worse than the bank. Boots in Northbrook St with those dreadful windows and the ex Vodafone building in the Broadway. More or less a brick wall with a couple of windows chucked in.
I think it is a common understanding that the post office tower is probably the ugliest modern building in the south of England. It's made even worse by the proliferation of aerials on top. I wonder if they all obtained planning permission.
It's ugly - but it's got a lot of competition. I can't find anything that places it as the ugliest modern building in the south of England.
The aerials probably didn't need planning permission - IIRC the Thatcher governemt exempted them from planning constraints in order to ensure a decent mobile phone network could be put together quickly.
Barclay's bank is not that bad for a town centre business building. Some thought has gone into the design to make it a little softer and as already has been said, the roofline is in keeping.
Apparently there was a lot of consideration to bricks that should be used - resulting in the choice of (IMO) a particularly dreadful colour (at a time when local bricks were still available).
There are a further two very bland, modern buildings in town, which are far worse than the bank. Boots in Northbrook St with those dreadful windows and the ex Vodafone building in the Broadway. More or less a brick wall with a couple of windows chucked in.
Of course, there is the cinema..........
I'm told that a member of the planning committee that approved the Broadway monstrosity was appalled when he saw the result - claiming that he had no idea it was going to be so big .
The old council building (Mill Reef House) in Cheap Street is also impressively awful. Sadly there are many other examples: Iceland/Fabric Land etc block in Bartholomew St. The Kennet Centre (varying in awfulness depending on which bit you look at, but none of it is good). The only good thing about the cinema design is that it masks a chunk of the Kennet Centre. Halford House (Waterstones etc) and about 10 more Northbrook St buildings.
And, need I say it: Parkway (particularly the Park Way frontage).
It's ugly - but it's got a lot of competition. I can't find anything that places it as the ugliest modern building in the south of England.
The aerials probably didn't need planning permission - IIRC the Thatcher governemt exempted them from planning constraints in order to ensure a decent mobile phone network could be put together quickly.
Apparently there was a lot of consideration to bricks that should be used - resulting in the choice of (IMO) a particularly dreadful colour (at a time when local bricks were still available).
I'm told that a member of the planning committee that approved the Broadway monstrosity was appalled when he saw the result - claiming that he had no idea it was going to be so big .
The old council building (Mill Reef House) in Cheap Street is also impressively awful. Sadly there are many other examples: Iceland/Fabric Land etc block in Bartholomew St. The Kennet Centre (varying in awfulness depending on which bit you look at, but none of it is good). The only good thing about the cinema design is that it masks a chunk of the Kennet Centre. Halford House (Waterstones etc) and about 10 more Northbrook St buildings.
And, need I say it: Parkway (particularly the Park Way frontage).
Says a lot about our planning Department and WBC? I wonder what the thoughts are for our proposed Pigeon Loft Pavilion?
Well, a fair few years have passed and Barclays are soon to vacate the building. Is it as good as the experts said? Or would you prefer to see it replaced with a more traditional building? Or an ultra modern design?
All it needs is some Griffin wooden cladding to bring it into the 21st century.
Less than 100 - my favourite is the old George & Dragon (1920s), now the Art of Siam. M&S isn't too bad, but it replaced something far, far better. In general they did a lot better between the wars (anyone remember Timothy Whites?).
Post war - in town the best I can think of are in the Market Place, especially the old Mall entrance (now Pizza Express etc) which is a pretty good imitation of what it replaced while the Plaza replacement (Carter Jonas) fits in pretty well while still being clearly of its time.
Whilst built after the war they are all a pastiche of older styles. Not exactly modern architecture.....
And how is that bad?
Modern architecture gave us the Pearl Assurance building (Iceland etc), the BT Tower, Mill Reef House, the Kennet Centre, Boots, the Vue Cinema and many more monstrosities.
Barclays' Bank was 'good' modern architecture, praised in its day. The best anyone has said about it so far on this thread is that it is not that bad and its roofline is not too high.
No you didn't, but your comment read (to me) as if you were criticising the buildings I mentioned and hence felt there was something bad about building in older styles/proportions.
Quoted from 78
There is very little modern 'Architecture'.
So what do you mean by modern Architecture? A place like Newbury is not going to get many Gherkins or Gugenheims and does get far too many low budget eyesores - but surely they are all architecture.
What are your favourites - town centre or anywhere local?
Architecture to me is the aesthetics of a building playing the most important part in the design of the building. Meaning that the look of the building dictates the way in which it is built & not the other way around. This is hugely expensive, so we end up with steel framed boxes hung with prefabricated panels.
The Barclays bank building is an interesting building. The way in which the windows crenelate in & out gives the building a look of strength - exactly what you want for a bank. Almost too much as without the Barclays logos etc it would make a good double for a CIA building. Someone thought about the use of the building & the Bank paid extra for those design elements to be in the final design. It needs a facelift though.
The 70s chalet style houses along the Cold Ash road opposite Down House are good. The Lamb is also nice.
Older proportions look good because of the golden ratio, not because they have mullioned windows.
Logged
Male
. 
