Cotswolds catastrophe closes the clause's case
I hope that the AJ is satisfied that the campaign to save PPG 7 is fully exonerated by the proposal from Adrian James Architects for a 'Modernist' country house in the Cotswolds, which you published last week (AJ 15.7.04).
Myself, I think this bloated ugly monster one of the most inept designs I have ever seen published. It rather goes to prove the opposite of the AJ's 'Save the Clause' campaign - that money can't buy good taste.
Good architecture can be cheap (the trailer extension that won the Small Projects Award earlier this year) or it can be expensive (the Scottish Parliament), but at its heart it is about good design and this published example (supported by CABE! ) shows that PPG 7 is exactly what is says on the tin - a rich man's planning loophole. The country house is dead as a social construct and we all enjoy visiting the stuffed remains at the weekend, but it certainly does not follow that we should support the creation of these Frankenstein monsters with stitched together follies, summer houses and gazebos.
The AJ, its silly campaign and all the pathetic toadies who have signed up to it should come clean. Is this project any good?
If not, then neither is the clause - case and clause closed.
Crawford Wright, Taunton, Somerset