Park Hyatt London River Thames Opening In 2022

Filed Under: Hotels, Hyatt

World of Hyatt is my favorite hotel loyalty program, and Park Hyatt is my favorite Hyatt brand. I’m always thrilled when the portfolio expands, and new Park Hyatts are added in exciting destinations, whether we’re talking about city hotels or resorts.

Up until now, Hyatt hasn’t had a true luxury hotel in London. I’ve written before about how London might soon be getting two Park Hyatts. Well, Hyatt has made an official announcement about one of these properties today, so I wanted to post an update regarding that.

Park Hyatt London 5 Strand

Before I talk about the more recent news, I wanted to recap the previous Park Hyatt London opening we knew about. At the beginning of the year I wrote about how a Park Hyatt would be opening at 5 Strand, near Trafalgar Square. At least that was according to plans filed with Westminster City Council at the time.

Based on the plans, the hotel would be 11 stories and have about 200 rooms, plus two restaurants and a bar. However, if that Park Hyatt does open, it will be in many years, as a building needs to be demolished before construction can even start.

Personally I think it’s far from a sure bet that this Park Hyatt will actually open, given how much can change with new hotel openings.

Park Hyatt London One Nine Elms

There’s another Park Hyatt that’s potentially going to be opening much sooner. One Nine Elms is a mixed-use skyscraper project currently under construction in London, and it will have a Park Hyatt.

The development will feature a 43 story River Tower, and then a 58 story City Tower. The 43 story tower will feature 109 residential apartments, plus a Park Hyatt.

The 203 room Park Hyatt London River Thames will take up the first 18 floors of the smaller tower. This will feature retail stores and two restaurants on the ground floor, a spa and pool on the first floor, conference and meeting facilities on the second floor, a terrace on the fourth floor, and a clubhouse on the 17th floor.

Construction of this development is expected to be completed by 2022, meaning that we could see a Park Hyatt open in London in just a couple of years.

Rendering of the Park Hyatt London River Thames lobby

Bottom line

There are two different Park Hyatt developments coming to London. The one we learned about at the beginning of the year is likely still many years away (and I wouldn’t be surprised to see it branded as something else), while the Park Hyatt London River Thames is expected to open in 2022. Hyatt has now officially announced that it has the management contract for this property.

Ultimately many people may not love the location of One Nine Elms, and it’s perhaps also a bit disappointing (but not surprising) that the hotel will take up the bottom half of the tower, meaning the views likely won’t be that amazing.

That being said, I still very much welcome a Park Hyatt in London.

Are you excited about the Park Hyatt London River Thames?

  1. Nine Elms is a great area. It’s by the new redevelopment of Battersea Power Station. The US embassy. The entire area is under development. It includes the sky pool which is a 25 metre swimming pool between two buildings 35 metres up
    Apart from having good transport links , it’s easy to walk to Lambeth , Westminster , Pimlico and Victoria

  2. A while ago we visited London (geez, it was right after the royal wedding) and stayed in a couple of hotels. At the time one was base2stay near Earl’s Court station (I believe). It was nice because it was down a residential street (or it seemed that way to me), quiet, and they didn’t try to screw up on the mini-fridge or movies.

    Then we spent a couple of nights at the Churchill. Didn’t care for that at all. The location was a heavy business area with too much foot traffic and the hotel was a bit over the top for us.

    I don’t mind staying at some of the Park Hyatts but mostly they just seem like a waste of money/points. Only a fool would pay $50+ dollars for a breakfast (for whatever reason, not due to status, we got free breakfast at the Milan Park Hyatt). I’m looking mostly for quiet, clean, safety and location.

  3. @rich I stayed at the Park Hyatt in NYC – had a local colleague/friend meet me for breakfast. The bill was USD120! It was nice but not that nice. I am a globalist so was free but there is no way I would ever have paid that for breakfast.

  4. Definitely disappointed with the Nine Elms location. That, and the renders of the interiors look more like a generic St Regis than any Park Hyatt I’ve seen (which typically incorporate more wood and nods to surrounding culture).

    I will definitely be more excited about 5 Strand if that works out. Phenomenal location.

  5. I’m a fan of Hyatt and appreciate any comments on benefits including breakfast. I sometimes wonder if hotels in general charge exorbitant rates for breakfast, room service, etc., knowing that the demand is small but steady, so might as well charge the moon for it. And Globalists (or Diamonds or whatever) will feel good getting it free as part of their top status.

  6. @rich

    I’d argue that Portman Square and Marylebone as a whole is far more residential than Earl’s Court.

    Forget that Oxford Street is walking distance from Portman Square – that isn’t the point.

    Earl’s Court is definitely a majorly commercial area with the exception of The Boultons (which prefer to be regarded as South Kensington anyway).

    Born and lived my whole life in West/Central London.

  7. This will almost certainly become the new U.S. Embassy hotel, just as the JW Marriott Grosvenor House and the Marriott Grosvenor Square relied upon the former U.S. Embassy at Grosvenor Square for a large portion of their business. Despite the embassy moving a year or two ago, the JW Marriott remains the embassy’s hotel because there isn’t anything suitable by Nine Elms.

  8. I prefer Nine Elms to Trafalgar, though I can see why some do not. But combine this location with a pool — something that’s nigh impossible to find in a London hotel — and I’m sold. Very easy to get to the City and Shoreditch by Tube, while parts West can be hoofed. My favorite activity in London is aimless strolling, so count me in.

  9. The Nine Elms location is probably there because location advantage of being close to the new US Embassy in London. Hyatt has tons of federal government contracts on their hands.

    Diplomats or any other federal employees travelling for official purposes would definitely prefer to stay closest as possible to the embassy, for security reasons of course.

    Except the US Embassy, the location is not very good. Min. 40 minutes walk to any major tourist attractions in London, even to the closest Tube station is 12 minutes worth of walking.

    No wonder why President Trump said this: “I am not a big fan of the Obama Administration having sold perhaps the best located and finest embassy in London for ‘peanuts,’ only to build a new one in an off location for 1.2 billion dollars. Bad deal”

  10. I always stay in Vauxhall, which is right next to Nine Elms. I really like the area and find it convenient. Usually at the Best Western or the Holiday Inn Express. It will be nice to have a (much more) upscale option.

  11. Nine Elms and its vicinity has nothing to offer but boring, generic urban designs and architecture. The whole area doesn’t incorporate anything of its local culture.

  12. @Andrew it won’t be a 12 minute walk when the new Nine Elms underground station on the Northern Line opens next year. This will also connect it to Bank.

  13. the prices for the park Hyatt puts me off and I’m sure the one in London will fall into that category …

    I usually stay at the Edition on the north side of Covent Gardens and it’s not cheap about 450£ (About $600 US) a night during the week ..

    so I can only imagine the prices at the park Hyatt London will be ??? 600£, 700£ a night.

    Not all park Hyatt’s are out of this world expensive … the Vienna one is reasonable compared to others in the city .. about 400 Euros a night .. but I will admit .. worth every penny !

  14. @K4
    “Earl’s Court is definitely a majorly commercial area with the exception of The Boultons”

    Nonsense (and it’s the “Boltons”).

    Earl’s Court was for many years a poor-ish peripheral suburb with good transport links: it became famous/ notorious after WW2 for the incredibly high proportion of transient Australians who stayed there on their student / extended trips to “the motherland”. There was mile after mile of densely-populated terraced housing converted into small flats.

    It’s the same today, but those flats will cost you at least £1m, and the Australian students have fled to much cheaper suburbs — Willesden is now very popular.

    Earl’s Court is full of French families working at high-paying jobs in The City (great transport links), living close to the French Institute and school in much more expensive South Ken.

    Earl’s Court is primarily residential (though with some commercial activity — though the closure of the famous exhibition centres has significantly reduced that, as that vast site is also converted to residential). It’s a hugely mixed area, with some of the most expensive residential real estate in London alongside hostels for homeless people and (still) rented rooms and flats for poorer in converted terraces.

    Nine Elms is a dump, though it may improve when the Northern Line extension reaches Battersea, stimulating more up-market housing. The only reason I can see for this location for the Hyatt is, as others have written, the construction of the new bomb-proof US Embassy fort there. Hideous building in a hideous district, far from anywhere of tourist or business interest.

  15. @The nice Paul
    Other than the spelling of Boltons, I’ll definitely call you out on the ‘nonsense’.

    The comparison was to Portman Square, which is within the most residential part of W1, Marylebone.

    Earl’s Court happened to have the huge commercial expo centre, it may be closed but the land is certainly zoned as commercial.

    The Earl’s Court one way system is nothing but commercial. As are the intersections with Brompton Road, Fulham Road and the A4.

    This huge glut of “small flats for Australians” ,(sic.) which you refer to, are bed sits above shops (guess what? Commercial buildings).

    The “French families” are mostly in South Kensington, not Earl’s Court.

    Is the huge commercial activity you’re referring to on Portman Square occurring in Bickenhall Mansions? Orchard Court? Dorset House? Or perhaps Portman Tower? (All residential blocks for those not familiar).

    Are you an estate agent by any chance? Likely one who does not live anywhere near West London and more likely somewhere like Stoke Newington.

  16. @K4
    You just can’t help writing bollocks, can you?

    The Earl’s Court one-way system is commercial? No. Southbound there’s a stretch of shops along the northern part of Earl’s Court Rd (either side of the tube station). Then miles of terraced housing stretching all the way down to the Fulham Rd. Northbound it’s almost all terraced housing (have you even been down Finborough Rd?), interspersed with an occasional pub or a very occasional corner shop.

    Mile after mile of terraced housing in all the other streets (plus a tiny stretch of commercial on The Old Brompton Rd, home of the fabulous Troubadour cafe).

    The demolished exhibition centres are not “zoned” for commercial; they are now the site of one of the biggest new housing developments anywhere in central London. Check out the hilarious political rows between H&F Council (which oversees the majority of the site) and RBKC.

    I suppose you could argue the historic Brompton cemetery was “commercial”, though that seems a stretch.

  17. @The nice Paul

    Now now, just because you’re loosing the argument doesn’t mean you need to use profanity.

    Mile after mile? I think that ends the argument right here. Earl’s Court isn’t mile after mile, it’s 1.2 miles from the Tesco on Cromwell Road to Chelsea & Westminster hospital, which are both extremities and Earl’s Court is not even a mile wide at the broadest definition. If you’re encompassing South Kensington, parts of Chelsea, Fulham and Barons Court into your definition of Earl’s Court it’s easy to see why you are so misinformed.

    I’m not sure how an unbuilt site comes into the equation. Last we knew it was an exhibition centre, and it’s not housing yet.

    But foremost, you make no comparison to Portman Square or Marylebone. Do enlighten me as to where the equivalent of Earl’s Court Road is to Portman Square? Perhaps there’s a hidden Tesco in Orchard Court I was unaware of.

  18. @K4
    I think you’ll find you were the first to descend into profanity when for some reason you decided to accuse me of being an estate agent…

    I have literally no idea why you’re citing places not in Earl’s Court as “proof” that, as you put it, Earl’s Court is mainly commercial.

    Let’s remind ourselves of what you actually wrote:

    “Earl’s Court is definitely a majorly commercial area with the exception of The Boultons [sic]”.

    You then followed that up with this idiocy:

    “The Earl’s Court one way system is nothing but commercial”

    Here’s an idea: why don’t you go on google street view and look along the length of Finborough Road — the core northbound part of the one way system. Try to count how many commercial premises you see among the housing, and see if you need more than the number of your fingers.

    You are wrong, wrong, wrong, and no amount of obfuscation will cover that up.

    Earl’s Court is predominantly housing, not commercial. By a massive margin.

  19. @The nice Paul

    Asking if you’re an estate agent is profanity? That’s news to me.

    You certainly sound like one, citing French families and Australian travellers being the main residents of Earl’s Court.

    Such a reality only exists in Estate Agent jargon and is far from realistic.

    Estate agents also tend to consider the Boltons part of Earl’s Court, hence my assumption.

    Back to the subject at hand. You are still yet to compare Portman Square to Earl’s Court.

    We could even go so far as comparing the actual statistics of which area is more residential, but are you honestly telling me that the area north of Oxford Street, including Portman Square feels more commercial than Earl’s Court with shop after shop, multiple tube entrances (there isn’t even one tube station in Marylebone’s W1 section – Baker St and Regents Park are both fringing NW1), nearly every high street takeaway known, hostels and bedsits (which are commercial – not residential), offices, currency exchanges, airline offices, etc etc?

    This compared to the huge Bickenhall, Portman, Orchard, Blanford, Seymour etc residential blocks surrounding Portman Square. Seriously??

  20. @K4
    Are you on drugs?

    “are you honestly telling me that the area north of Oxford Street, including Portman Square feels more commercial than Earl’s Court”

    No. I’ve never mentioned Marylebone. I’m simply arguing with your utterly incorrect statements about Earl’s Court.

    I am also specifically arguing with this nonsense assertion:

    “The Earl’s Court one way system is nothing but commercial”

    Did you bother looking at Finborough Road on Google street view? That’s most of the north-bound part of the one way system and is 99% residential. Continuing north, after it changes its name to Warwick Rd, doesn’t help you — with the exception of the demolished exhibition halls, that’s even more predominantly residential than Earl’s Court.

    The southbound side is more mixed, but is still not a majority commercial — that’s largely confined to the north, around Earl’s Court station, with a bit on Old Brompton Road.

    I’ve no idea why you now seem to having a tube station is a measure of whether or not an area is primarily residential or primarily commercial. Neighbouring Chelsea, an area far more mixed than Earl’s Court, is notoriously under-served by the tube. Does that mean the King’s Road isn’t commercial?!

    Though I have noticed your exciting new attempt to get out of the hole you’ve dug, by now arguing that rented accommodation is actually commercial, not residential. Laughable.

  21. @The nice Paul

    The entire basis of my initial comment is in comparison to Portman Square, so if you choose to ignore that aspect, every post you have made in till you acknowledge that fundamental point is invalid!

    A hostel or bed sit is not a hallmark of a residential area.

    Just as hotels are commercial so are hostels and bed sits. To suggest otherwise is madness.

    The areas considered residential in London, for example, Hampstead, Greenwich and Richmond are not teeming with hostels. Oh, and they also have busy high streets but that does not make them commercial areas…

    Anyway, by admitting to ignore the whole fundamental point that it is a comparison to Portman Sq, you have admitted yourself you were wrong the whole time.

    Oh and Chelsea has a heck of a lot more housing than Earl’s Court without a shadow of a doubt, given it’s a lot bigger………

  22. @K4
    You’re bonkers!

    I quoted the bits of your posts which were just plain wrong and I told you why they were. You suddenly banging on about something utterly irrelevant to that is, well, irrelevant to whether or not you stated things which were factually garbage.

    You were wrong about Earl’s Court. That’s the only point I have ever wanted to make.

    I am not arguing with you about, er, Marylebone and Richmond because I don’t know them very well and, so far as I can tell, you haven’t told any lies about them.

    I’m still waiting for you to agree that your statement about the EC one way system being “nothing but commercial” was just nuts.

    And I really do love your definition of bedsits as “commercial” (I see you’re bringing in hostels now, to try to wrap them together. I’ve made no comment on hostels…).

    Presumably you think if a flat owner has a mortgage that’s also a form of renting and, therefore, commercial…?

    You could argue any property owned outright but on leasehold is also commercial, I guess. Though that would certainly prove the insanity of your writings.

  23. @The nice Paul

    Ok, I will admit that the northbound section is more residential than commercial now that the exhibition centre is gone.

    I would like to mention though, that it takes around half a century for the reputation of an area to change not 5-10 years. The exhibition centre hasn’t been gone for 50 years yet, and the area is in fact named after the expo centre, not the other way around; just like Crystal Palace. The area is at the confluence of West Brompton, Fulham, South Kensington, and Kensington, prior to the exhibition centre, most of it would have been one of those areas.

    There were entrances to Earl’s Court on the northbound A3220.

    Olympia, although in Kensington is still alive and well – and Earl’s Court Olympia was often a thing, with exhibitions taking place in both Earl’s Court’s halls along with Olympia.

    Regarding bedsits, these are usually rooms above shops, let for weeks. I wouldn’t consider a privately let apartment commercial, of course not. But ‘an Australian’ who wants to stay above McDonald’s, for 3 weeks is different. The building is primarily commercial, and when there is an opportunity, the rooms above are let.

    Oh, and my initial post was ‘I’d argue that Portman Square and Marylebone as a whole is far more residential than Earl’s Court.’

    How you can suddenly take Marylebone out of the entire equation and focus on one part of the post in abeyance of the rest is really ignorant.

    It’s like, someone says ‘Emirates is a good airline in First Class’. Then you turn around and argue about how bad Emirates is in Business!

    Earl’s Court is more commercial relative to Portman Square.

    The fact that Portman Square is near Oxford Street, and in W1 (which is known as more commercial than residential, due to Soho, Fitzrovia and South Mayfair) is moot; Portman Square itself (and that part of Marylebone) is highly residential and that is the point I was making to @rich.

    I can see why a tourist may feel they are in a more commercial area, because they are closer to Oxford Street for example, but that is deceptive, and that is why I raised the point.

    Is Earl’s Court residential relative to Richmond? Of course not.

    Is Earl’s Court commercial compared to The City? Also certainly not.

    Is Earl’s Court commercial compared to Portman Square? I am arguing that it indeed is.

    Without relativity my comment was meaningless anyway. Most areas are commercial and residential.

  24. @The nice Paul

    Talk about digging your own hole, hey!

    You: I quoted parts of your post, which sound wrong on their own. I conveniently ignored the qualifiers and am not discussing the entire sentence. Only the parts I do not like or agree with.

    The Times “Covid cases on the rise in France”

    You: Covid cases are not on the rise in the UK. The Times is bonkers, I am ignoring the part about France because I do not know France well.

    Is this starting to hit home yet? How illogical and insane your last few posts have been?

    You also ‘told’ me to go on Google Street View, and check something. Why would anyone do what you tell them? Are you paying them?

    You may or may not be a bad person, but someone who expects others to do as they say, just because, and ignores parts of a sentence because it suits them is certainly a very particular type.

  25. @K4
    I realise you struggle to focus on one thing at a time, and I guess you hope if you spray enough accusations around that the slower-witted might be distracted, so let’s look at just one single, complete sentence that you wrote. No qualifiers, no sub-clauses:

    “The Earl’s Court one way system is nothing but commercial.”

    Please tell me how that is, in any way, an accurate sentence.

    As opposed to being 100% wrong. Completely. Totally.

    There just is no way to spin that sentence which could make it anything but insanely wrong.

    You can blur her on all you like about made-up articles about Covid in France (WTAF?!), but that doesn’t distract from just how totally wrong you are.


  26. @ The nice Paul

    You’re still looking at individual sentences and not the entire post, and now taking them out of context.

    I really suggest you read entire articles and posts, rather than picking and choosing bits.

    I don’t know which school you went to, but taking bits of text and making your own meaning out of it isn’t what I was taught.

    The Earl’s Court one way system is perhaps the most commercial part of EC.

    Within context, although my original sentence is an exaggeration, is not a huge stretch either.

    The context is the key thing you’re totally missing. IT IS IN COMPARISON TO PORTMAN SQUARE!

    I realise that you chose to ignore that part, but the fact that you chose to ignore that just shows how inane your argument is. It doesn’t make it stronger.

  27. @K4
    “The Earl’s Court one way system is perhaps the most commercial part of EC.”

    Hurrah! The truth is out there — well done. I completely agree with that sentence. It’s accurate. It’s factual.

    It’s also completely different from what you wrote before, but I am delighted we finally got to a place of truth.

    Well done, you.


  28. @ The nice Paul

    Still singing from your own hymn book, with missing verses it seems.

    My original sentence was perhaps an lacking detail and an exaggeration but in context, it’s purpose was to point out a significant commercial area within what is an extremely small locale – Earl’s Court. The sentence served the purpose.

    The second sentence is great on its own. It portrays an absolute reality, but it does nothing to emphasise the size of Earl’s Court’s commercial significance, especially given how small the area is.

    Whilst the second sentence may please you, it is still irrelevant to the whole discussion – I believe EC to be a more commercial area than Portman Square.

    When you read books, do you ignore the book itself and pick out sentences which serve no purpose out of context and criticise them?

    I’m guessing you didn’t get very good grades in English literature. Again, this is speculation, not profanity as you do seem to struggle with language.

  29. @ The nice Paul

    I made the comparison to Emirates in a previous post, which I think you missed.

    However, a better example would be, someone says Emirates First Class is better than British Airways (First Class), but you go on to argue how British Airways is better in WT+ because that is the only cabin you have flown and totally forget that the discussion was about comparing the carrier’s first class cabins!

  30. @K4
    No, a better comparison would be you suddenly writing some bullshit like:

    “BA First is 26 seats across.”

    And then insisting you were really arguing about the galley size, before conceding that you might have been exaggerating a little, but clearly I’m an idiot with a poor education.

  31. Ben, did you know that Park Hyatt Kuala Lumpur will be opened somewhere around next year? This hotel occupies the highest 17 floors of Merdeka 118, soon-to-be the world’s 2nd tallest building.

  32. @ The nice Paul

    Earl’s Court one way system is commercial, mainly on the Southbound stretch, at also at the intersections of Fulham Road and Brompton Road.

    Do you agree with this sentence?

    Great, I knew you would.

    It’s wordy and unnecessary. Even I were to exaggerate and say, the Earl’s Court one way system is commercial, it would be correct in a literal sense, and is known as Hyperbole. Maybe you have heard of this?

    Hyperbole may be a concept beyond you, but picking and choosing things is frankly ridiculous and then instructions to someone you do not know. You are a very special type, I’ll say it again.

  33. @K4
    “Even I were to exaggerate and say, the Earl’s Court one way system is commercial, it would be correct in a literal sense”

    Oh my God, I realise now that English can’t possibly be your first language. It’s therefore incredibly rude of me to point out your dumb mistakes.

    By definition, an exaggeration cannot *literally* be correct.

    You can have one or the other. Not both. Nor do you seem to understand the meaning of hyperbole. And for the record:

    “Earl’s Court one way system is commercial, mainly on the Southbound stretch, at also at the intersections of Fulham Road and Brompton Road.
    “Do you agree with this sentence?
    “Great, I knew you would.“

    No, I do not agree. It is not that it is wordy, it’s that it is just plain wrong. As a minute looking at Finborough Road on Google street view would show, but I know you’re not interested in actual facts.

    What’s that — you say BA has literally over a thousand WT+ seats on each of its planes…?

  34. @ The nice Paul

    You absolute dunce. Finborough Road is SW10, which is Chelsea. Earl’s Court is ONLY SW5.

    Your definition of the word literally is that of a Californian teenager in the 90’s.

    When I say literally correct, I mean it is correct according to English Literature theorems, whence Hyperbole is an advanced form.

    Sorry but dunce is the only word for you. SW5 is a commercial area, the housing development you’re referring to is not built yet. The area is better know for the closed expo centres than this future development, and unless you work for Foxtons, there are neither “Australian students” or “French families” in EC. That is utter rubbish. EC has M&S, KFC, Maroush, Halal Guys, zafash 24h pharmacy (the only pharmacy, which is 24h in London currently, the Edgware Road ones now close at 3am – and if that doesn’t tell you how commercial EC is I don’t know what will) and short let’s (days at a time akin to hotels).

    Get a grip already.

  35. @K4
    Wrong, wrong, wrong.

    Firstly, you referred specifically to the EC one-way system, which runs through both SW5 and SW10 (my guess is more of it is in the latter than the former, though I haven’t checked).

    But, but… you yourself referred to the southern boundary of EC as being the Chelsea & Westminster hospital, which is on the Fulham Rd and whose postcode is … SW10.

    Make your mind up!

    You’re clearly a bit confused. Maybe I was wrong before, and the problem is that you’re not actually taking enough drugs…? Literally.

  36. @ The nice Paul

    This is getting fun, you just keep making a bigger fool out of yourself.

    The Earl’s Court one way system, is a section of the A3220, which in fact starts at White City, runs through Notting Hill, Shepherd’s Bush, Kensington, Earl’s Court, Chelsea, Battersea, and terminates in Clapham.

    Clearly if we are talking about Earl’s Court, we are not talking about all of the above areas, but only the section in EC.

    Therefore, only the section of the A3220 in SW5 is relevant. The section in SW10 is in Chelsea, and nothing to do with this discussion.

    “Earl’s Court isn’t mile after mile, it’s 1.2 miles from the Tesco on Cromwell Road to Chelsea & Westminster hospital, which are both extremities and Earl’s Court is not even a mile wide at the broadest definition.”

    Does this say that the Chelsea & Westminster hospital is the southern boundary of EC? No it does not, it says it is an extremity. I have sunk to the level of checking dictionaries and just to prove how stupid you are, and have confirmed that a synonym of extremity is periphery or fringe. The Chelsea & Westminster hospital is on the periphery of EC, not inside it.

    Again, you are reading sentences and having no concept of the intended point. This sentence was to illustrate that you are absolutely incorrect to say EC has miles and miles of housing, which you incorrectly did. Why? Even from one fringe to another EC is barely a mile long. How can an area, which is not even a mile from one end to the other have miles and miles of housing?

    The Chelsea & Westminster hospital is, in fact pretty irrelevant in the sentence, in fact if I had used Our Lady of Dolours R C Church, or Servite RC Primary School or Kensington and Chelsea College or any landmark in that vicinity, it would have made absolutely no difference to the point being made. The point was only relevant to the length of EC, not what is in or outside EC.

    But you did of course also do the same thing before, by taking a comparison of EC to Portman Sq totally out of context. You read what you want to read, and I’m actually loving showing the readers how dense and self affirmed one person can be.

    Please keep digging your hole.

  37. @K4
    You are so sweet to me.

    I suppose if you think EC co dusts of just two roads, each a mile long, then you wouldn’t understand how all the other roads in EC can be added together to give mile after mile of housing. Many, many miles of terraced houses, all within one small area. Bless you.

    But I suppose you think those are also all lined with shops and offices, what with your dumb-as-a-brick assertion that “The Earl’s Court one way system is nothing but commercial”, and that the rest of EC is predominantly commercial.

    Fascinating how you have now decided EC is, strictly, only SW5, when you started off by asserting that the Boltons [sic] was the residential exception in EC. The Boltons is, of course, in SW10.

    You duck and you weave, but you just end up tying yourself up in the lies and mistakes you’ve already made. If only you could go back and edit your comments, to make them all consistent!

    One parting thought: if you can excuse your own nonsense, mistakes and exaggerations as being literary devices, why do you not offer the same courtesy to me? You claim that I am making mistakes (even though you refuse to look at the proofs) — ok, if that’s true, why am I not allowed to use them as literary techniques, just like you are allegedly doing? If you really believe in those literary devices, why are you arguing the toss about “facts” with some random anonymous poster?!

    Sleep peacefully, K4, in your drug-hazy world of deluded alternative facts.


  38. @ The nice Paul

    Mile after mile would imply continuous miles, no? Very hard to achieve when the area itself is neither a mile wide nor long.

    Boltons in SW5 –

    Please do explain to me what literary device is being used by mixing up SW5 with SW10?

    Hyperbole is a literary device, exaggeration to an extent is too. What device are you using? Factual inaccuracy? Or the high form of intellect that is known as selective reading?

    It was always in comparison to Portman Sq, and you’re still ignoring that.

    Until you comment on EC’s commercial activity compared to Portman Sq, you continue to be practicing the fine art of selective reading.

  39. No wonder why President Trump said this: “I am not a big fan of the Obama Administration having sold perhaps the best located and finest embassy in London for ‘peanuts,’ only to build a new one in an off location for 1.2 billion dollars. Bad deal”

    Well, Trump WOULD say that, because if Obama has anything to do with something, Trump disparages it. If Obama had sold the former embassy for $2B and paid one pound to build the new one, Trump would still be whining about it, just because Obama did it.

    Fact is, the Grosvenor Square Embassy was a nightmare to keep secure, particularly considering how deeply, deeply unpopular (and I’m being charitable here) the United States is with many and varied extremists, terrorist, and crackpots from around the globe. That’s why the new Embassy was built in the middle of nowhere, with security measures to rival Florence Supermax.

  40. Ben – what is the point of this article? If you are going to do updates then please make it clear what the new information is because it’s not clear.

  41. Nice to see another Hyatt offering, also Pan Pacific are opening a new hotel in the city opposite the Andaz Hotel Liverpool Street Station, was supposed to open this month but unsurprisingly it’s looking like early next year.

  42. Bad area, and the interior design does look like a generic St.Regis rather than a Park Hyatt (as someone else had mentioned).

    Being near the US embassy is not a pro, with London’s proximity to the middle east and all the hatred the middle east has for the US.

  43. I very much enjoyed the serve and volley provided by @K4 and @The nice Paul; I particularly enjoyed the discussion as to the finer points of the english language. This blog provides so much more than travel advice!

  44. Andrew – to confirm as follows: the previous United States embassy was sold under the George W Bush administration.

  45. @K4 for the win! But a nice volley from @Nice Paul regarding the “estate” profanity…very clever. If only Antifa would argue their points like these two fine gentlemen.

  46. Andaz Liverpool Street is the ideal hotel for me. It is my go to hotel In London.

    Sure, I am looking forward to the Park Hyatt in London. I wonder which category it will be.

  47. +1 to @UA_Flyer. I lost my Andaz virginity to Liverpool St, so it has a special place in my heart (*a beat*). Location, location, location — plus a great staff and an enjoyable quirkiness.

Leave a Reply

If you'd like to participate in the discussion, please adhere to our commenting guidelines. Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

Reminder: OMAAT comments are changing soon. Register here to save your space.