On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 20:35:47 +0100, Ian Jelf
wrote:

In message , Greg Hennessy
writes
No building under 100 years old should be listed period.

I know that tastes differ but that's just a *bit* sweeping, don't you
think? :-)

The Hoover Building?

A thin facade on a supermarket. Leveling the site and building housing on
it would have far better served that part of West London.

2 Willow Road?

Especially 2 Willow Road. Add everything else the hypocrite inflicted on
society at large to the list also.

Bankside Power Station?

A.n other ridiculous waste of extremely scarce resource.

It and Battersea should never ever have been built in the middle of London
in the 1st place.

One has to ask why more self serving worthies such as Serota et al at the
Tate deserved a handout valued at 10's if not hundreds of millions.

Coventry Cathedral?

If the local religious tribe feel that they need a new place to worship,
it's no concern of those who don't.

Liverpool Cathedral (either one, come to think of it)?

See above.

City Hall in Norwich?

A decision for Norwich and it's local electorate, not worthies living
nowhere near the place.

The facade of Buckingham Palace?

If her Maj feels the need to change it and is picking up the bill, why not.
55 Broadway?

Site has got to be worth a large sum of money on the open market, freeing
up resources which could be much better utilised elsewhere in the tube
system.


if self selecting worthies want to impose the costs of their architectural
tastes on society as a whole.

They have two choices.

They can buy said properties and do with them what they will.

Or they can consult the local electorate directly through a proposition
system and abide by that decision.



greg


--
Müde lieg ich lieg in der Scheisse,
und niemand weiss, wie ich heisse.
Es gibt nur einen, der mich kennt,
und mich bei meinem Namen nennt.