Alan Dunlop's comments
There will be a proper business case made. It is not a proposal for a community centre, nor some kind of arts school.
It would work Judith, I agree. From albatross, to dove to phoenix, very clever........ if you don't mind I'll use that in future.
Indeed Robert, it's secluded but not remote and certainly not inaccessible.
John Bute's intervention and his ambition to make the abandoned St Peter's Seminary a community building and a learning and manufacturing resource, to help stimulate economic and social regeneration in Argyll and Bute deserves support .
According to Design Week the design industry contributes £4.3b each year to the Scottish economy. Scottish and international artists, architects, industrial designers, graphic, textile and fashion designers, car and furniture designers could come together in Taigh Togail, in studios and residences to produce work of outstanding quality, bringing jobs, creating apprenticeships, working with manufacturers to make those works in a single place that has international acclaim in a stimulating and creative environment for the economic and cultural benefit of the people of Argyll and Bute and Scotland.
The building is made for it, with its extraordinary plan, genius structure and abundance of natural light. It would be an asset. St. Peters would and should be inclusive, creating work and opportunity for all. A dove carrying an olive branch, not an albatross
The Bauhaus "aimed to reunite fine art and functional design to create practical objects with the soul of artworks". Taigh Togail would do the same.
"tough character of the past, and hopefully this won't all be lost." Indeed.
In all my years going down to the river I've never seen the Clyde so blue, and inviting, it's like the Med. Is that a tree growing in the centre too? very clever. On the water, those high rig yachts with their de-mountable masts to get under the Clyde Arc and speedboats are all lovely. And look, the existing barriers that could hold back a herd of rampaging elephants and stop emergency vehicles and the occasional drunk slipping into the river have gone, replaced by a light balustrade. Love it
Well done ASL It says "Glasgow, eh..... wha's like us?" all right you've captured everything that makes the Clyde and the city's maritime history important and unique in one single image.
Good luck with it.
in my own MArch units, young women have often been the most talented and creative students.
Why many women are not running major practices or making a more significant contribution to the profession is, consequently, disturbing.
Architecture has always been driven by an exhausting and unnecessary devotion to work. This starts at university where you are given credit for the amount of time you are prepared to put in above all else. In practice, this culture continues and it is expected that you work long hours, much of which are unpaid.
It may be that young women have other priorities and there is a woeful lack of financial support and adequate childcare provision, particularly for women who want to break this burden of expectation and have children.
That a very low percentage of women become head of school or take up senior positions is also disturbing.
I asked one of my students in Liverpool a very talented young woman why there seems to be a limited number of women leading practices and universities, she wrote this:
"Architecture is 'sold' as a 7 year course and aged 18, this is long but maybe not too long to deter us, thinking it will all be done age 25. Then we get into the course, which has its own issues with a culture of long hours and mentally draining, and realise we most probably will not be fully qualified Architects anytime soon.
For my male colleagues this is maybe not so worrying, but for myself and female friends it is a worry that our career choice pushes back other considerations, notably having children. The lack of flexibility in the structure of qualifying and a general lack of flexibility in practice until you are in a more senior role, compounded by the fact that many remain a Part 1 in practice for 2 years and a Part 2 in practice for around 3 means we are not qualifying until our late 20s and not reaching a place in our career to consider a family until later. Data shows women in architecture are leaving it later than the national average to have children, 32 compared to the national average of 28. I am sure wanting to be secure in your position in practice is a key factor for this later age -
I cannot think of any cases of Part IIs having children and staying on in practice.
A factor mentioned in the Ethel Day article cites gender discrimination. I have not experienced this myself particularly, in my Part I there were a couple characters in the office that I would say were very close to the line, generally the older male architects, but I am glad to say this was never a probably throughout university.
Neither have I heard stories from friends at Liverpool. I would note that there is sometimes a tendency for tutors to assume female students will be more sensitive, or a joke made in a crit to that fact."
Congratulations Patrick, a pretty remarkable resolution for a challenging site. Very clever plan. Good luck with it.
I remember that RIBAJ eye line drawing. Beautiful work
Notwithstanding, of course there are serious concerns over the quality and long term durability of a significant number of projects delivered by PPP and so called not for profit contracts.
The same apparently is true in the UK, which runs contrary to the community becoming the focus, or than PPP can ever improve social, economic, building, design or procurement standards.
Profit and bottom line economics is the driver not community, nor social benefit.
PFI has been discredited, Philip Hammond said as much in October. Trouble is, how will new schools and hospitals in the UK be built without PFI/ Private Public Partnerships?
In Scotland, The Scottish Nationalists introduced the Scottish Futures Trust SFT, ten or so years ago as a " not for profit" way to replace PFI. The performance of 45 projects delivered under SFT is yet to be audited, by Audit Scotland, however the estimated £3bn ( FOI information requests regarding build costs is always dismissed due to commercial confidentiality )it has cost to build hospitals, schools, leisure centres, police stations etc is anticipated to cost Scottish Taxpayers around £10bn over 30 years.