By continuing to use the site you agree to our Privacy & Cookies policy

Your browser seems to have cookies disabled. For the best experience of this website, please enable cookies in your browser.


Your browser is no longer supported

For the best possible experience using our website we recommend you upgrade to a newer version or another browser.


Robert Wakeham's Comments

  • Comment on: Developer could have to rebuild London pub brick by brick

    Robert Wakeham's comment 30-Apr-2015 9:48 am

    I hope the architects for the proposed replacement building have the sense to wash their hands of this project - if cowboy clients have difficulty in finding architects who are willing to jump into bed with them it would be good for both the profession and the country. I also hope that the nationwide company whose name was emblazoned on the demolition plant has to account for just what they thought they were doing - otherwise it's difficult to see them retaining some of their largest clients. Lastly, I hope that the resolve of the authorities involved doesn't waver, isn't undermined by 'behind the scenes' influence being brought to bear, and that this building really does rise from the dead.

  • Comment on: SAVE launches petition against Hall McKnight's Strand plans

    Robert Wakeham's comment 30-Apr-2015 9:32 am

    SAVE is surely absolutely correct in its assessment - the pressure to enable a large and influential institution to consume its surroundings like some sort of malignant growth has to be resisted - the damage done by the University of Edinburgh in past years is surely the classic ample of what not to do. And the sheer drabness of Hall McKnight's proposal adds insult to injury.

  • Comment on: Row ignites after British Land compared with Nazi Germany

    Robert Wakeham's comment 29-Apr-2015 10:40 am

    British Land refers to a 'heritage-led scheme' - is this developer-speak for large scale demolition of an area? It's surely rather gracious of Mr Cruickshank to suggest that British Land's behaviour has been quite good.

  • Comment on: Piers Taylor wins planning for Croydon Passivhaus

    Robert Wakeham's comment 28-Apr-2015 10:10 am

    An ingenious design for an 'interesting' site - but why, oh why, such a dark brick skin - 'dark' seems to have become the signature feature of so much contemporary work.

  • Comment on: Architect rethinks plans for threatened East End oddity

    Robert Wakeham's comment 28-Apr-2015 9:55 am

    Thank goodness it hasn't suffered the fate of the soon-to-have-been-listed Carlton Tavern in Maida Vale, suddenly and illegally demolished the day after Easter Monday in a manner reminiscent of the outrageous destruction of the Firestone Building in Brentford in 1980.

  • Comment on: Studio Octopi starts crowdfunding for Thames Baths

    Robert Wakeham's comment 27-Apr-2015 11:41 am

    If I was going to rank - on a scale of 1 to 10 - the Thames Baths project, and the 'green bridge', in terms of appropriate interventions on the river, these baths would be up there at 1 and the 'green bridge' would be an also-ran.

  • Comment on: Hall McKnight hails planning victory for contentious Strand plans

    Robert Wakeham's comment 23-Apr-2015 12:45 pm

    A notable attribute of the existing range of buildings, apart from architectural variety, and interest, is that they're not drab - more than can be said of their replacement, which seems to be following the current widespread trend in London for dark and rather dismal buildings. Does the level of atmospheric pollution justify this, or is it just fashionable?

  • Comment on: Euston Arch rebuild efforts move forward

    Robert Wakeham's comment 22-Apr-2015 12:47 pm

    Boris would surely be better advised to have TfL contribute to this inspired project than to pursue the elitist and dysfunctional garden bridge folly.

  • Comment on: Garden Bridge objector given judicial review boost

    Robert Wakeham's comment 22-Apr-2015 12:43 pm

    If only the judicial review could also examine Transport for London's use of public money to help fund a bridge that has no provision for cyclists - the clue is in the word 'transport'. Boris would be better advised to put the money into reconstructing the historic Euston Arch

  • Comment on: Adam defends contentious Classical tower proposals in Reading

    Robert Wakeham's comment 20-Apr-2015 11:24 am

    So I wonder what changed Historic England's mind?

  • Comment on: Contentious Hall McKnight plans set for approval

    Robert Wakeham's comment 17-Apr-2015 12:35 pm

    This reminds me of the bad old days in Edinburgh, when the university did so much damage to the character of George Square - assisted by the clout of big-name architects - but I thought that we'd moved on from the attitudes that prevailed in the 1960s. Maybe not.

  • Comment on: End this 'slaughter' of cyclists by construction lorries, says Murray

    Robert Wakeham's comment 16-Apr-2015 9:33 pm

    I've always thought that being a pedestrian is a basic human right, whereas being a motorist is a privilege - but I can't decide where being a cyclist should be, between these two extremes, and I can't help feeling that the daft behaviour of a minority of cyclists encourages some drivers to treat them with contempt, and some pedestrians to have no sympathy for them - despite the obvious hazards that they face in most British city streets.

  • Comment on: Profession reacts: make London safer for cyclists

    Robert Wakeham's comment 16-Apr-2015 10:18 am

    Joe Morris mentions cyclists jumping red lights and riding on pavements, and while these people are clearly a small minority they're very visible, and I - as a pedestrian - despise them for their utter irresponsibility. I suspect that they do enormous damage to the reputation of cyclists in central London amongst not just pedestrians but - more critically - taxi drivers and all the other drivers who spend their working lives in this area. My early morning bus journeys from Euston down to Southampton Row, and short walk east along Theobald's Road, were a real eye-opener - both for the conflict between cyclists and frequently stopping buses, and for the tidal wave of cycles on Theobald's Road, frequently ignoring pedestrian lights and frequently on the pavement at the junction with Southampton Row. These were clearly experienced cyclists, but deserved to be banned, and I wonder whether there's a need for some form of licensing, with heavy penalties for dangerous cyclists as well as dangerous drivers?

  • Comment on: Finally: Robert AM Stern Architects set for UK debut

    Robert Wakeham's comment 14-Apr-2015 12:52 pm

    At least Foster's design respected the scale of the place, and that statement in the planning documents is an interesting interpretation of evolution - is it my imagination, or would Mussolini and the Ceausescus have recognised the qualities in this impressive pile?

  • Comment on: Elips completes ‘Italian-style’ pasta café

    Robert Wakeham's comment 13-Apr-2015 11:09 am

    I can just about understand the concept of keeping everything white - except the entrance door.

  • Comment on: Garden Bridge Trust launches 'myth busting' campaign

    Robert Wakeham's comment 13-Apr-2015 10:44 am

    I apologise for getting Jane Merrick's name wrong (no edit facility) and add that Transport for London want to invest public money in a new Thames crossing closed to cyclists? Really? - after the tragedy last week that so clearly demonstrated the need for safer cycling routes in London, and destroyed the life of someone who really did know what good design is all about?.

  • Comment on: Garden Bridge Trust launches 'myth busting' campaign

    Robert Wakeham's comment 13-Apr-2015 10:28 am

    Merrick is absolutely right in criticising this silly vanity project, which so clearly symbolises what happens when privilege, power and patronage get out of hand.

  • Comment on: Replica of Preston bus station 'printed' in China

    Robert Wakeham's comment 1-Apr-2015 9:53 am

    You could almost believe that it isn't 1st April - I just wish that the Joanna/Thomas/Boris project for their garden bridge over the Thames had been a 1st April affair.

  • Comment on: English Heritage recommends Grade II* listing for ‘Ship’

    Robert Wakeham's comment 1-Apr-2015 9:43 am

    Hooray - but now let's see if whichever minister - and government - is landed with taking the decision manages to avoid being bent to the will of the building owners.

  • Comment on: Copper Lane by Henley Halebrown Rorrison

    Robert Wakeham's comment 28-Mar-2015 6:03 pm

    A beautifully crafted group - and, for someone living far from London, it's refreshing to note that none of the reviews that I've read have made any reference to the absence of provision for parking.