Chris Medland's comments
Agree with Simon. Yes Kahn has been a bit flip-floppy but that was probably genuine uncertainty as what would be the best thing to do with the utter mess that Johnson left him. Ultimately this shower sits with Johnson personally, his deputy mayor, the garden bridge trustees and (a reluctant inclusion) Heatherwick. God help our economy if imminent events lead to BJ's installation as PM.
very nice. hope planning consent is granted
It may be fun for a weekend getaway in the forest or mountains but I do wonder what long term health implications there are for anyone living in such small spaces for the long term.
I agree with Robert above... the residential/ hotel block design is no more at this stage than a poor massing diagram absent of vision. Completely out of character for such an eminent practice.
looks great - look forward to visiting one day
Clearly my view is arguably myopic due to by my 7 yearlong obsession with the delivery of another bridge further upstream (long story that doesn’t make it into the press) but this debacle has reached peak annoyance now particularly as it turns out that the £20m loan much lauded as a great deal for the tax payer was in fact utter hogwash and absolutely zero is actually a loan that is repayable. Utterly ridiculous situation.
so am I right in thinking that the trustees of a charity asked the government to take the cost risk for them on their sole project, the whole purpose of the charity, so that they would not carry any financial risk personally if the venture came crashing down? Directors and trustees insurance is available commercially, and is in fact (I believe) a legal obligation but instead of this/as well as this they wanted the treasury to back them..... and the treasury said yes?
Next time I take out car insurance or PI for that matter I will ask the treasury to cover my excess and see what answer I get....
Dear Paul - it is not the Mayor who has landed us with this bill. As the AJ's great research shows, all other issues aside (need, location, procurement, environmental damage etc.), it was the decision of the trustees in January 2016 to sign a construction contract that had huge cancellation costs when they had not even established a legal right to build on the land. This decision is noted clearly in the publically available minutes and despite all the risks to our money they proceeded regardless. Do you agree that it is important that when spending (and applying for) millions of pounds of public money that an organisation must act with due care and diligence?
arguably, in reference to his point about suffering a loss as a result of the Trustees actions, the good people of Battersea & Fulham (and anybody passing through) have suffered a direct loss that is measurable....
Large scale developments like this are typically unaffected by passing cycle of recessions and booms as the amount of time they take to plan and build can be a decade or more. The can being kicked down the road is a stark reminder that the uncertainty of Brexit is causing greater risk to projects of all scales which developers are seeing as unacceptable. Given the stalling of the housing market and the problems the retail sector are facing I wouldn't be surprised if other large scale developments slow down or even stop. Battersea Power Stations next phases for instance and work around the Olympic Park. Sadly, I fear we could be looking at a few years of very limited workload for the entire industry as the major players wait to see how the cards are dealt.