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'll assume we have your consent to use cookies, for example so you won't need to log in each time you visit our site.
Learn more

Report this comment to a moderator

Please fill in the form below if you think a comment is unsuitable. Your comments will be sent to our moderator for review.
By submitting your information you agree to our Privacy & Cookie Policy.

Report comment to moderator

Required fields.

Headline

McAslan considers changes to contentious Burrell plans

Comment

Possibly good news - John McAslan is too good an architect to wilfully compromise a fine piece of architecture, and clearly big enough to listen to criticism, but the attitude of the client should perhaps be of rather more concern; a few years ago I noticed the very poor state of repair of the Museum of Modern Art (the very fine former Royal Exchange) in the city centre, with mature vegetation established on the cornice of the north elevation and signs of severe water damage to the stonework. I phoned Glasgow Life, was put through to a person involved with maintenance, and got a polite hearing from someone who didn't sound particularly interested. The current Google StreetView image of the building from the Queen Street corner shows this area last June obscured by scaffold access for work on the tower, so I'd like to think that the whole building is now better cared for. But I just wonder if the quality of the management of Glasgow Life matches up to that of what it's supposed to be caring for? It would be a great shame if John McAslan's readiness to take on board fair comment was negated by a client with deaf ears - and as for the city planners, and Historic Scotland, who knows?

Posted date

23 June, 2017

Posted time

11:49 am

required
required
required
required