Government submits plan for improvements to Sea Terminal

[Boris Johnson]

1 hour ago, The Bastard said:

It is of a certain time, so it makes you wonder if there are issues with construction materials or structural complications that made it unsuitable to open to the public.

Personally I see it more as functional than iconic. There is a certain brutalist charm to the "lemon squeezer" but other than that, it's just concrete, lots of it basically unused space.

It's not a Brutalist Design, it is better than that,  it may have had influence from that school but the Sea Terminal is totally unique. 

It is a building that should be cherished and maintained properly, IIRC the Asbestos was removed a while ago.

It should be protected and the tacky additions sripped back, NOT added too with railings and more closing in of the space under the "Crown" to give it its proper place in the island's history with its unique design.

 

[Happier diner]

1 minute ago, Boris Johnson said:

It's not a Brutalist Design, it is better than that,  it may have had influence from that school but the Sea Terminal is totally unique. 

It is a building that should be cherished and maintained properly, IIRC the Asbestos was removed a while ago.

It should be protected and the tacky additions sripped back, NOT added too with railings and more closing in of the space under the "Crown" to give it its proper place in the island's history with its unique design.

 

I understand your point. Maybe not 100 practical to achieve but I see it.

IMO the same terminal is not the jewel in the crown . Its a tired old Eastern bloc type concrete building that has seen its heyday. 

Saying that though we are not so rich that we can just knock it down on a whim.

[Stu Peters]

I’ve only recently joined the DoI and started to attend meetings at the Sea Terminal. Whilst I do think it might make a good transport interchange (except when buses AND ferries arrive at the same time) I don’t think the building lends itself to anything much else above the ground floor. And this is essential maintenance of a public asset surely, rather than a vanity scheme?

[Cinderella]

3 hours ago, The Bastard said:

It is of a certain time, so it makes you wonder if there are issues with construction materials or structural complications that made it unsuitable to open to the public.

Personally I see it more as functional than iconic. There is a certain brutalist charm to the "lemon squeezer" but other than that, it's just concrete, lots of it basically unused space.

Asbestos? Would date from that era. I remember the restaurant - going there for dinner was in the treat category. 

[Non-Believer]

6 hours ago, Happier diner said:

Hey Frank. This has shifted the focus onto DOI and away from DBC. 

Nice work. I see what you did. 

Thanks Ray.

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

Thanks Ray.

Ray?

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Non-Believer said:

Thanks Ray.

This week so far I have been Matt and now Ray. Maybe I am missing the joke but I dont know either of them. You do know that revealing the identity of a poster is against the rules of the forum don't you?

Yours

Matty Ray👨‍❤️‍💋‍👨

 

[Roger Mexico]

1 hour ago, Stu Peters said:

I’ve only recently joined the DoI and started to attend meetings at the Sea Terminal. Whilst I do think it might make a good transport interchange (except when buses AND ferries arrive at the same time) I don’t think the building lends itself to anything much else above the ground floor. And this is essential maintenance of a public asset surely, rather than a vanity scheme?

But if it's just essential maintenance, it wouldn't need planning permission at all (the building isn't Registered, even though it ought to be).  There would be no need for architects or drawings and all the rest or the moving of the fire exit.  It's typical of the way that the DoI tends to ignore maintenance until things get bad, and then turn it into some expensive 'project', when it would be simpler, quicker and muck quicker just to fix stuff.

And if you think that something would make a good interchange unless there is more than one type of thing there, I don't think you've quite grasped the concept of 'interchange'.

[Moghrey Mie]

I thought that building had 'concrete cancer' and will require regular repairs for that.

Edited December 24, 2022 by Moghrey Mie

[Happier diner]

1 hour ago, Roger Mexico said:

But if it's just essential maintenance, it wouldn't need planning permission at all (the building isn't Registered, even though it ought to be).  There would be no need for architects or drawings and all the rest or the moving of the fire exit.  It's typical of the way that the DoI tends to ignore maintenance until things get bad, and then turn it into some expensive 'project', when it would be simpler, quicker and muck quicker just to fix stuff.

And if you think that something would make a good interchange unless there is more than one type of thing there, I don't think you've quite grasped the concept of 'interchange'.

To be fair Mexico, you are speculating here. Is it fair to say you dont actually know. You dont know what maintenance was done or not. Bit of a generalisation.

Wrt to planning. Yes you are correct to maintain a roof but if you replace the roof with a different material you might.

[CallMeCurious]

7 hours ago, The Bastard said:

It is of a certain time, so it makes you wonder if there are issues with construction materials or structural complications that made it unsuitable to open to the public.

Personally I see it more as functional than iconic. There is a certain brutalist charm to the "lemon squeezer" but other than that, it's just concrete, lots of it basically unused space.

The kitchens were on the first floor with a dumb waiter to the top floor. Not sure building regs would allow a single means of escape from the 3rd floor with a public restaurant nowadays. Also probably a lot of ACM's lurking in there too.

Still think there should be a bus rank out front with waiting area inside. Could have bus tracker on big screens, ticket sales in the Welcome Centre and with ready made CCTV, shops, cafe, toilets all under cover.  

[Happier diner]

1 minute ago, CallMeCurious said:

The kitchens were on the first floor with a dumb waiter to the top floor. Not sure building regs would allow a single means of escape from the 3rd floor with a public restaurant nowadays. Also probably a lot of ACM's lurking in there too.

Still think there should be a bus rank out front with waiting area inside. Could have bus tracker on big screens, ticket sales in the Welcome Centre and with ready made CCTV, shops, cafe, toilets all under cover.  

Maybe a fire escape might be a good idea. Even for the dumb DOI staff.

[Non-Believer]

2 hours ago, Happier diner said:

This week so far I have been Matt and now Ray. Maybe I am missing the joke but I dont know either of them. You do know that revealing the identity of a poster is against the rules of the forum don't you?

Yours

Matty Ray👨‍❤️‍💋‍👨

 

I'd suggest that given your knowledge and craven support of a good 90% of DOI activity and "achievements" since 2016, particularly regarding the Promenade at the time,  (the remaining 10% is reserved for the absolutely indefensible), my suspicions are justified.

[Happier diner]

Just now, Non-Believer said:

I'd suggest that given your knowledge and craven support of a good 90% of DOI activity and "achievements" since 2016, particularly regarding the Promenade at the time,  (the remaining 10% is reserved for the absolutely indefensible), my suspicions are justified.

HaHa. Funny guy

I dont remember ever supporting the mess that was the prom did I?

[John Wright]

The comments are hilarious. They have no relation to the area the work is being done. Even RM’s. Although he did link to the application.