Unsupported browser

For a better experience please update your browser to its latest version.

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

We use cookies to personalise your experience; learn more in our Privacy and Cookie Policy. You can opt out of some cookies by adjusting your browser settings; see the cookie policy for details. By using this site, you agree to our use of cookies.


Recent activity

Comments (19)

  • Comment on: Glasgow School of Art sacks architecture tutor over criticism of board

    Just's comment 5 March, 2020 10:03 pm

    Is their a student perspective on these machinations...?

  • Comment on: Hoskins’ Scottish National Gallery revamp faces more delays after asbestos discovery

    Just's comment 12 February, 2020 9:49 am

    Novel upwards 'value engineering' (by whom): £9m-£16.8m-£22m-next £??m, when will this thirst for over zealous public projects be quenched? This all whilst citizen projects struggle for modest funds that bring tangible benefit.

  • Comment on: Foster + Partners shortlisted to design new islands in Malaysia

    Just's comment 30 January, 2020 5:54 pm

    Err and how exactly is this a sustainable precept

  • Comment on: Finally: wHY reveals rejigged Ross Pavilion plans two years after contest win

    Just's comment 30 January, 2020 11:57 am

    The proposal is being developed in isolation to the existing relationship between the Gardens and Princes Street. The relationship between the streetscape, the Gardens and the auditorium is fundamental to the mis-en-scene, this must not be compromised and should be an integral part of the offer and not be left to event management to conjure up ad-hoc temporary solutions.

    There should be no screening of the gardens or blocking of the footway at Princes Street at any time. The auditorium also should be open to view from Princes Street as has historically been the case. If it has to rely on screening to operate this should be limited to the auditorium only and must form part of the overall design conceit i.e. the use must fit the setting and any notion of visual conflict or barrier whatsoever between the Street scene and the gardens would be unacceptable.

    “Consultation” is all about the questions asked...thereby is the problem and EDI has to find a better approach to engage citizens ie 680 ‘supporters’ of this scheme cannot be taken to be representative of citizen view (C/f population in 2015 of only(!) 498,800) especially when 270 were not keen so thats a net support v’s no support ‘result’ of 410 people in EDI think this is good for go...just saying...!
    If that amount of people are taken to be giving the project support -regardless of its merit- the “...product of four years' of engagement with stakeholders and the people of Edinburgh” then that’s hardly something to celebrate.

  • Comment on: Brits lined up for Saudi ‘giga-project’ Qiddiya

    Just's comment 29 July, 2019 9:04 am

    I do “Declare”, how beautifully this meets the sustainability agenda (not).

View all comments