Robert Wakeham's Comments
Comment on: Profits up at Urban Splash
Good to see a really inspirational developer bouncing back from the hard times of recent years, and very good for the likes of the city of Plymouth.
There's a degree of underlying arrogance in the belief that this project is without doubt a great asset and in no way a disruptive imposition - and the notion that 'London has treated the Thames as an obstacle to breach' is simplistic in the extreme With work proceeding beyond the design stage, I wonder who's paying for it - is the joint commitment of £60m of public money, by Boris & George (at the same time that George is demanding the nation's books be balanced and pulling the rug from under large areas of the welfare system) already being drawn down?
How about 'the emphasis' at pavement level - what appears to be a solid (brick?) wall, utterly out of character with the rest of the street.
It's interesting to compare the new facade with those of the flanking buildings - despite the undoubted care taken by good architects to try and design in sympathy with the surounds, it really is banal in comparison. There's no image of the two office buildings being replaced, but Google Streetview shows the right hand (northerly) one to be a piece of mid 20th century banality, but the other - much older looking - building would appear to be far more in character with the street than the new proposal. Does this type of development need to be pastiche to avoid degrading the street? Surely not, it should be possible to design a new building that's neither banal nor pastiche - especially when the architects are as skilled as these.
When 5 Broadgate is 'delivered' next year it'll be interesting to see what impact this megastructure has on its surrounds.
Comment on: Foster wins Cardiff bus interchange contest
Good thing he's not a brilliant female architect, from Iraq.
New London Architecture are surely unwise to be involved with the Mayor of London when he's associated with what appears to be a rigged selection process for the designer of the proposed 'garden bridge'.
Comment on: Hall McKnight's contentious Strand plans dropped
It's important to be fair to everyone involved, but it leaves the question of whether 'meeting the brief' is sometimes followed too slavishly by those supposedly qualified to know better.
Comment on: TfL boss orders Garden Bridge review
As Heatherwick Studio's experience in bridge design is apparently limited to just one project - the 'hedgehog' novelty footbridge produced to add interest to the Paddington Basin development - presumably either Heatherwick employs architects with extensive bridge design experience from elsewhere, or it's not so much his studio as his structural consultant who has the relevant experience. Whatever the facts, at least he's not up there with Mr Johnson in the asinine riposte to Caroline Pidgeon. I'm not sure whether Mr Johnson's attitude to beauty bears close examination - and his stellar career path is beginning to display some unfortunate parallels with that of the affable Mr Blatter.
Comment on: Revealed: Gensler’s £300m Shoreditch tower
Architecture? - stacked boxes?
Comment on: Design competition urged for HS2 viaduct
Another case where the notion of a bridge as tourist attraction is being punted - but this time there's a good deal more utility, and sense, to it. Even if it's unlikely to be up there with the Millau wonder by Foster & Virlogeux.
Comment on: Expert slams Garden Bridge business case
I know what Scotland will make of it - it's really no more than a bare-faced scam, but then with Boris Johnson's involvement that's not altogether surprising. What is surprising is that some otherwise well informed and very well respected personalities in the British architectural firmament seem to have been blinded to the seamier aspects of the affair - perhaps dazzled by novelty?.
Comment on: Rogers: 'The Garden Bridge will be a jewel'
Opening up new perspectives? Surely doing more harm than good when it comes to perspectives, and it beggars belief that the rather clod-hopping 'landings' of the bridge will actually require the eradication of a good number of trees. It's surely clear that the function of a bridge providing a useful and reliable link for people across the river is in direct conflict with the restrictions imposed on access to a garden that requires protection, careful maintenance and closure at night - and when required for private garden parties. Hardly a 'vital new connection', and the argument - however seductive - that it'll be another Manhattan Highline is not comparing apples with apples.
Sorry, 'Historic England'.
So far so good, but just how dysfunctional is English Heritage?
I just wonder about the bridge trust's 'projected annual revenue surplus' and their 'robust business plan'. That, plus the blatant double-speak from the mayor's office, makes me suspect that the real scenario would have the 'commercial activities' crowding out the public access to the point where the bridge would really only be a very, very obtrusive private pleasure garden. And the taxpayers' very considerable commitments would create not so much a safety net for the bridge as a trampoline for Boris.
I just don't understand how seasoned politicians like Boris Johnson and George Osborne can continue to root for a very high profile 'boutique' project that offers little more than novelty value when it involves their committing £60 million of public funds while at the same time rooting around squeezing the lifeblood out of public services to reduce the national debt. They seem to share the notion that the bridge will be a tourist attraction, and an advertisement for British design ingenuity. They might also like to consider the implications of what seems to be a blatantly dishonest procurement process and profligate use of scarce public funds to create an essentially private folly. This is such a glaring faux-pas that it might just be the 'straw that breaks the camel's back' as far as the 'United' Kingdom is concerned, given the widespread contempt in Scotland for what some call 'Wastemonster'.
Looks as if 'the emperor's new clothes' have at last been rumbled.
Comment on: Corbusier: the architecture and the man
The reference to William JR Curtis's mention of 'messy contracts and estimates' touches on the (untold?) history of just how Corbusier's more exotic works came to be costed, tendered and actually built. I once asked the manager of the shop at Ronchamp whether there'd been much difficulty in finding a builder for the church - not only did she not know, it was clear that she'd never been asked that question.
To realise the airport's full potential it needs direct train services from the south - not just from the north of England and central Scotland.
Comment on: Camden slams HS2 for lack of vision over Euston
Whatever happens at Euston the decision makers should remember the mistakes of the past when light-filled airy concourses at large mainline termini were replaced by worm-burrows - Birmingham New Street Station here, Lyon Gare de la Part-Dieu and New York Penn Station.
Comment on: Theatre Royal by Page/Park Architects
A landmark street corner 'drum', whose complex elliptical curtain wall seemed to take a very long time to construct - but why such reticence when it comes to signage to indicate to the out-of-town visitor that this is the Theatre Royal?
A refreshing contrast to the surround buildings, but the 'cheek by jowl' juxtaposition of the 'cut end' of the new with the facade of the old makes the new look crude and overbearing - unless the two buildings aren't as close as the photos suggest.
Comment on: Garden Bridge to be built 'within 1,000 days'
'Bullish' is about right for a rather private project that is getting a big fat boost of £60 million of public money from a couple of 'old pals' from the Bullingdon club, and their perception of values at this time of drastic 'national belt tightening' in the public sector seems to be remarkably warped, to put it mildly. True, the Festival of Britain was staged at a time when the country was worn out, but this bridge is no morale-booster, it's a grand folly that might be fine in someone's private park but - if built - will go down in history as a very expensive (and intrusive) monument to some preening public figures at a time when the general population was being expected to accept massive cuts in the welfare state.
So... 'King's College said it was 'sensitive' to the 'architecturally significant environment' in which it operated'. They could've fooled me.
Comment on: One St Peter’s Square by Glenn Howells
It looks as if the designer has symbolised the developer's push for maximum floor space by exploiting the apparent weakness of the planning authority and extruding three more floors out of the top of this building, literally 'lifting the lid' on it. These architects are capable of much better than this.
Comment on: Coalition of critics slams the Garden Bridge
Is Paul Finch wearing blinkers?
Comment on: Garden Bridge Trust reveals planting vision
To answer Jacky Stevens, according to the blurb on the garden bridge website (questions & answers - fact vs fiction), cyclists are welcome as long as they push their bikes. So that's OK, then.
Comment on: Grimshaw’s Ship saved from demolition
Very good news; whether or not this building is listed the fabric will surely be far easier to maintain 'as existing' than that of a much older building - and surely whatever alterations are required for its new function will be carried out sensitively, given the comments from the new owner.
Comment on: DCLG places Strand plans on hold
Good news, surely, for anyone hoping that enlightenment - and common sense - will prevail.
Comment on: Stop moaning, the Garden Bridge is fabulous
'Imagination' is one thing, and Lumley & Heatherwick seem to have plenty, but there's too much of the 'Emperor's New Clothes' about the pushing through of this project, with its rather selective attitude to who can actually use it as a route (and when) - as well as who's competent to design it. I don't think that a new private bridge in the centre of the capital city of a possibly truncated Britain, procured by sleight of hand, aping the physical form of neighbouring bridges but apparently intended as a novelty item to promote the inventive genius of the nation. The 'Highline' it's not, and I think that it's more gimmick than long term asset - though I'd be keen enough on it if I was an urban fox, with either four legs or two.
To Marc Massin: I think that the 'green bridge' is ridiculous because it's intended to be more a private space than a public route, with restrictions on use that prevent cycling, prevent access 24/7, and reserve the right to close it for private functions. Despite this, Boris is helping finance it with public money via TfL (and to hell with the need for safe cycle routes). To add insult to injury, it's going to block vistas of this stretch of the Thames - and, I suspect, become used as eloquent testimony to the unacceptable face of Conservative government.
With Boris pushing hard to build the ridiculous 'green bridge', regardless of the implications, I wonder if we can expect more such cosy 'arrangements' to part-fund the construction of elitists follies at a time of increasing austerity (for some)?
Comment on: Bennetts reveals Edinburgh Uni scheme
So, clad in 'natural stone and marble-aggregate polished concrete to reflect the character of its Georgian surroundings' - really? These Georgian surroundings don't figure in the published images, and are presumably facing this development on the opposite side of the street. Actually, no - just a range of nondescript modern five storey blocks of flats over retail, save for one older section of what might loosely be termed 'Georgian' but doesn't really look it. The only consistent feature that's remotely Georgian is the eaves height.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.
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.