Further to Richard Waite’s article about the new Museum of Liverpool (News, AJ 15.11.07), I write to clarify some elements in the piece.
Firstly, the decision to move from travertine to Jura – a finergrained natural limestone – was based on quality and performance, not cost. In fact the cost of each stone was very similar. What we found is that the travertine panel which we have been testing on site for the last two years does not stand up to the environmental demands of the waterfront location.
Furthermore, a travertine stone facade does not meet our specification for the removal of graffiti. We are building a museum of supreme quality which will look pristine for the next 100 years – the move to the Jura will protect that intention.
Secondly, Kim Nielsen’s statement that ‘all architectural solutions were kept within the economic framework’ is true only because the client and the wider team have spent considerable time and effort undertaking extensive value engineering to keep the scheme on budget.
Thirdly, it is not true that we as the client want ‘significant architectural changes’. The form of the building remains unchanged, with the exception of some amendments of detail required to bring 3XN’s designs up to UK building standards.
Sharon Granville, executive director, Museum of Liverpool