Robert Wakeham's Comments
'Attempt' is the polite word for BDP's latest version of their design proposal for the George Square facade of Glasgow's Queen Street station expansion. This tilted curtain wall with heavy roof overhang might have been appropriate for an airport terminal building, but is ugly and lumpen in the context of George Square. BDP's original, lower, elegant transparent glass screen wall was fine - and enabled the Victorian train shed gable to be seen from the square. The latest proposal is quite disastrously unsympathetic to the surrounding buildings - and if built it would be a monument to the insensitivity of the BDP architects, of the planning authority - and of Glasgow, the erstwhile 'City of Culture'.
Gordon MacGregor might not be aware that there's already action by the renewable energy industry to put projects on hold pending clarification of government policy after this week's vote. Near where I live in Argyll a fairly large, but uncontroversial, wind farm project was about to start on site but has now been frozen - and the same company has frozen their other project in Scotland. Nothing 'vague' about it. As for Helen Lucas's comments about 'fantastic creative energy', it seems to me that there's plenty of that in Scotland anyway, and there does seem to be a notion fostered by the 'Yes' campaigners that Scotland is a poor, decrepit, hollowed out shell of a country. Really? This is not to say that there isn't the urgent need for radical reform of the governance of Britain - anyone living outside the London area (and not just in Scotland) must be aware of the extraordinarily unhealthy coincidence of concentrated wealth and political power in just one patch of the country. Without reform, there really is a risk of enormously damaging fault lines opening up within England, let alone between England and Scotland.
Walter Menteth's observation of the lost opportunity might yet prove to be premature, if Westminster gets a sufficiently hefty kicking but Scotland opts to remain within the fold - and the implications for the English regions could well be immense.
I very much hope that these two symposia don't turn out to be forums for promoting the idea that to restore the School of Art 'as built' would be to condemn it to just a repro 'Mockintosh' sham. This view was being promoted last week by the former director of the Charles Rennie Mackintosh Society and chair of the Friends of the Glasgow School of Art, David Mullane - who seems to have got carried away by the concept of modern interventions in the fabric of historic ruins. The Glasgow School of Art is not a ruin.
Comment on: Frank Gehry dropped from World Trade Centre job
I wonder, what are Maggie Boepple's credentials?
Interesting that the station incorporates escalators, unlike the proposals for Ealing Broadway - I wonder if the predicted passenger numbers at Woolwich Arsenal are greater than those for Ealing Broadway?
Paul Finch refers to a massive disservice to London and Londoners; How about the massive disservice to the rest of the country if Heathrow were to be shut down? Johnson, Moylan and Foster seem to think that only London matters, so perhaps it would be best if London were to be 'floated' as a separate city state, Singapore style, leaving the rest of Britain (including Scotland, to my mind) to pursue more balanced physical and economic development strategies.
I wonder how many people would guess 'its presence as a beach hut' (despite its location) in the face of such strong architectural references - which, to me, suggest some early Victorian public utility, probably a pumping station, and not a lighthouse (despite its location).
Comment on: Planning victory in Isle of Man for Foster Lomas
Great Britain needs its main hub airport shifted to the other side of London like it needs a hole in the head. This is not about Great Britain, and it's not even really about London - except in the sense that it greases the way for Boris to further his political ambitions by gaining election to a parliamentary constituency - Uxbridge & South Ruislip - that would be a much quieter place should Heathrow be removed. True, land would be released for more housing, with good transport connections, but the commercial development - and very substantial employment - created by Heathrow would all move out, shifting to the 'empty spaces' (green belt?) of Essex or Kent. The London urban splodge would expand massively to the east, mainly to the benefit of developers, builders, designers - and, of course, Boris.