King's Cross Lighthouse to get revamp

[MrSki]

After twenty years!

Latitude Architects has won planning permission from Camden Council for a £13 million internal reconstruction of the grade II listed Lighthouse Building in King’s Cross, London.

The building, which formerly housed offices and shops at ground level, has been empty for 20 years and has appeared on English Heritage’s buildings at risk register.

Latitude’s scheme retains the building’s listed facade and creates 2,000sq m of offices, with 900sq m of retail and restaurant space on the ground floor.

A new stepped and vaulted zinc roof will accommodate a new floor for the building, and has led to the design being called a “hunchback armadillo”.

Developers UK Real Estate, Latitude and The London Planning Practice have been negotiating with English Heritage and Camden Council for more than 18 months to develop the design.

I thought it might fall down before it was sorted.

[marty21]

that block is really derelict now, it's a pity cos there were quite a few businesses there before, I like the lighthouse, hopefully they will do a good job on it

[toblerone3]

I often wonder about that little triangle of land and wonder what's going on thinking that it must be some intractable planning blight cause by being on the borders of Camden and Islington.

I also think that this could be the end of the day for Mao Zedong!

[marty21]

Originally Posted by toblerone3

I often wonder about that little triangle of land and wonder what's going on thinking that it must be some intractable planning blight cause by being on the borders of Camden and Islington.

I also think that this could be the end of the day for Mao Zedong!

oh yes, you pointed that out to us on that walk, I'd never noticed it before

[toblerone3]

Nobody knows what the Lighthouse was for!

[marty21]

Originally Posted by toblerone3

Nobody knows what the Lighthouse was for!

it is a mystery!

[quimcunx]

good.

[MrSki]

Originally Posted by toblerone3

Nobody knows what the Lighthouse was for!

I thought it was alight when fresh oysters were being served in the oyster bar below?

[g force]

That is I think the most accepted reason but even that is unclear in this building's case....maybe the builder just liked Lighthouses?!?!

[editor]

Loads of info and pics here: http://www.urban75.org/london/oyster...ngs-cross.html

[toblerone3]

Originally Posted by MrSki

I thought it was alight when fresh oysters were being served in the oyster bar below?

From the Urban75 pages

"The official view used to be that the 'lighthouse' was an advertising feature intended to promote Netten's oyster bar which was immediately beneath on the ground floor. This is now shown to be unlikely."

[MrSki]

Originally Posted by toblerone3

From the Urban75 pages

"The official view used to be that the 'lighthouse' was an advertising feature intended to promote Netten's oyster bar which was immediately beneath on the ground floor. This is now shown to be unlikely."

Why does it seem unlikely? (cos it was not a feature anywhere else?)

About three months ago, I helped out somebody digging out a basement at the bottom of the Cally Road. (A stones throw from the soon to be ex Flying Scotsman) built around the same time as Keystone Crescent(1870s), I can confirm there where shed loads (well actually cellar loads) of oyster shells mixed in with the hardcore/foundations.

According to locals, one of whom died earlier this year (aged 98) & living in the same house as she was born in, The top of Gray's Inn Road used to be a funfair! Right next to where the Lighthouse is.

Only having oysters twice in my life (& suffering an allergic reaction both times, ) I could understand wanting them fresh.

For such an iconic building not to have more references when it was built I don't understand.

Maybe it was to navigate a peasouper.

It does split Pentonville Road (Quick rant for those not in KC, why does the spell checker, along with so many peeps ask how Pentonville Road is spelt? Did they never play Monopoly?) With Gray's Inn Road it could have been a guide for taxis in the dark.

The only reason it seems unlikely to me is that some poor bugger had to go upstairs and light the light.

I know that is was easily accessible for shooting pigeons in the mid to late eighties but also starting to crumble. (Hence why some bit are missing.)

I will follow on with my own percy reseach & try to dig out a photo or any other interesting fact.

Anyone with an objection, look at the time of my post & argue when the sun shines.

[editor]

Originally Posted by MrSki

Why does it seem unlikely? (cos it was not a feature anywhere else?)

The story is that the building originally served as an oyster house - oysters being the fast food of the day - with eateries often being marked by a lighthouses, much like McDonalds (spit!) uses the familiar Golden Arches to catch the eye of hungry punters.

Thing is, if the lighthouse motif was used as a commonly recognisable symbol for snack-seekers, how come no others survive?

I researched this pretty thoroughly at the time, and IIRC it was a topic on Robert Elms' radio show. No one could find any evidence of the tower being used for advertising, and by 1955 the building was plastered in ads anyway.

[wiskey]

Originally Posted by editor

Loads of info and pics here: http://www.urban75.org/london/oyster...ngs-cross.html

you're missing a 't' in 'this' in the caption under the walthamstow lighthouse pic

interesting reading though

[lang rabbie]

If this is the scheme that goes ahead, I'm rather pleasantly surprised. The zinc armadillo roof of the extension doesn't look too obtrusive.

http://www.latitudearchitects.com/ar...he-lighthouse/

[phildwyer]

This is good news, I'd assumed they were going to pull it down as part of the scorched-earth assault on the "old" King's Cross. Nice to see they are able to distinguish between the good and bad elements of the area's recent history.

[toblerone3]

I think there should be a light at the top of the Lighthouse.

[GuerillaPhoto]

was inside there/ on the roof last week and its a fucking state inside.

[lang rabbie]

Originally Posted by toblerone3

I often wonder about that little triangle of land and wonder what's going on thinking that it must be some intractable planning blight cause by being on the borders of Camden and Islington.

Having the Circle Line running a few feet underneath the site has also seriously limited the options for redevelopment.

[perplexis]

OMFG, I've walked past that building hundreds of times and never noticed it had a lighthouse on top. Wow!!

[Onket]

Originally Posted by GuerillaPhoto

was inside there/ on the roof last week and its a fucking state inside.

I see they've cleaned off some of the graffiti though.

[Onket]

Originally Posted by editor

No one could find any evidence of the tower being used for advertising, and by 1955 the building was plastered in ads anyway.

If it was plastered with ads then that'd fit in with the lighthouse being an ad in itself. Plus the lighthouse is higher than the top of that photo you posted, surely?

()

[editor]

Originally Posted by Onket

If it was plastered with ads then that'd fit in with the lighthouse being an ad in itself. Plus the lighthouse is higher than the top of that photo you posted, surely?

There's no photos or documentary evidence showing the 'lighthouse' operating as an advertising feature for the restaurant below.

[Onket]

Originally Posted by editor

There's no photos or documentary evidence showing the 'lighthouse' operating as an advertising feature for the restaurant below.

Couldn't possibly have been the case then.

[editor]

Originally Posted by Onket

Couldn't possibly have been the case then.

I've researched this quite thoroughly and couldn't find any evidence to support it being used as an advertising beacon. If, however, you can find some evidence to the contrary, I'd be delighted to update the article. Empty sneery comments just make you look stupid though.