In article ,
James Farrar wrote:

English Heritage are right and the 20th Century Society (whoever they
are, I've never even heard of them before) are wrong.

The C20th Society aims at preserving the best 20th Century buildings.

The original design intent wasn't to have 80-year-old tiles looking
terrible, and you just have to have looked at the difference between
Queensway and Lancaster Gate to see the difference retiling can make.

The remaining tiles at Great Portland Street don't look terrible.
And the samples of the new ones did not look like much of an
improvement.

Now that doesn't mean the responsible person in LUL shouldn't be
punished for violation of listed building regulations, but I'm
surprised that the committee felt a site visit was necessary. It's a
no-brainer to me.

I wasn't actually on the committee for the decision to make a site
visit (I'd swapped duties with someone else). However, there is a
limited amount you can learn about historic fabric without actually
seeing it in situ. And not every member of the committee travels
by tube (I do, but not all the Tories).

Westminster is not a planning authority which often goes on site
visits.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"We can also agree that Saddam Hussein most certainly has chemical and biolog-
ical weapons and is working towards a nuclear capability. The dossier contains
confirmation of information that we either knew or most certainly should have
been willing to assume." - Menzies Campbell, 24th September 2002.

On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 23:37:48 +0100, David Boothroyd
wrote:

In article ,
James Farrar wrote:

English Heritage are right and the 20th Century Society (whoever they
are, I've never even heard of them before) are wrong.

The C20th Society aims at preserving the best 20th Century buildings.

'best' does not include brutalist desctruction of towns and cities
throughout the UK, a school of architecture which appears to a favourite of
this self selecting group of unaccountable worthies.

No building under 100 years old should be listed period.


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.

Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 23:37:48 +0100, David Boothroyd
wrote:

In article ,
James Farrar wrote:
English Heritage are right and the 20th Century Society (whoever they
are, I've never even heard of them before) are wrong.
The C20th Society aims at preserving the best 20th Century buildings.

'best' does not include brutalist desctruction of towns and cities
throughout the UK, a school of architecture which appears to a favourite of
this self selecting group of unaccountable worthies.

No building under 100 years old should be listed period.

Funny, that's what they thought of Victorian buildings in the 50s & 60s,
and what the Victorians thought of buildings before them.


--
Dave Arquati
Imperial College, SW7
www.alwaystouchout.com - Transport projects in London

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 15:03:40 +0100, Dave Arquati wrote:

Greg Hennessy wrote:
On Tue, 08 Aug 2006 23:37:48 +0100, David Boothroyd
wrote:

In article ,
James Farrar wrote:
English Heritage are right and the 20th Century Society (whoever they
are, I've never even heard of them before) are wrong.
The C20th Society aims at preserving the best 20th Century buildings.

'best' does not include brutalist desctruction of towns and cities
throughout the UK, a school of architecture which appears to a favourite of
this self selecting group of unaccountable worthies.

No building under 100 years old should be listed period.

Funny, that's what they thought of Victorian buildings in the 50s & 60s,

'they' being talentless poseurs such as the Smithsons, Goldfinger et al +
their public sector sponsors who destroyed towns and cities in the
interests of 'modernism'.

and what the Victorians thought of buildings before them.

The Victorians didnt have ridiculous restrictions on land use.

The Victorians would not have countenanced leaving the site of a former
power station in the middle of London standing empty for decades because
unaccountable worthies deem it do.


If the '20th century society' (sic) deem buildings to be so important, they
can pay the price for keeping them.




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.

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?
2 Willow Road?
Bankside Power Station?
Coventry Cathedral?
Liverpool Cathedral (either one, come to think of it)?
City Hall in Norwich?
The facade of Buckingham Palace?
55 Broadway?
--
Ian Jelf, MITG
Birmingham, UK

Registered Blue Badge Tourist Guide for London and the Heart of England
http://www.bluebadge.demon.co.uk

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.

In article ,
Greg Hennessy wrote:
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? :-)
2 Willow Road?

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

Goldfinger was many things but hypocritical is not among them. He liked
modern functional buildings and built one for himself. He lived on the
top floor of Balfron House for two months. (OTOH look up the story
about him and Ian Fleming, and also the one about "Goldfinger here!")

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.

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

This manages to mention three buildings (Bankside, Battersea and
Liverpool Anglican Cathedral) designed by my favourite architect of
all time, Sir Giles Gilbert Scott. Scott had a genius for making
functional buildings into popular landmarks. In Battersea Power
station it is tragic that successive failures have left the building
in such a condition that the original chimneys have to be replaced
with facsimiles. Bankside has unfortunately been converted in a
quite unsympathetic way.

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.

But why would you want to demolish such a nice distinguished building?

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.

Speaking as a representative of the local electorate, I'd prefer that
we have guidance from experts on what is a proper historic building
design and what is undistinguished.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"We can also agree that Saddam Hussein most certainly has chemical and biolog-
ical weapons and is working towards a nuclear capability. The dossier contains
confirmation of information that we either knew or most certainly should have
been willing to assume." - Menzies Campbell, 24th September 2002.

David Boothroyd ) gurgled happily, sounding
much like they were saying :

In Battersea Power station it is tragic that successive failures have
left the building in such a condition that the original chimneys have to
be replaced with facsimiles.

Quite. Absolutely criminal what's been done to/with Battersea.

David Boothroyd wrote:

Speaking as a representative of the local electorate, I'd prefer
that we have guidance from experts on what is a proper historic
building design and what is undistinguished.

But you ignored the guidance from the experts at English Heritage
regarding Great Portland Street station.
--
Richard J.
(to e-mail me, swap uk and yon in address)

In article ,
"Richard J." wrote:
David Boothroyd wrote:

Speaking as a representative of the local electorate, I'd prefer
that we have guidance from experts on what is a proper historic
building design and what is undistinguished.

But you ignored the guidance from the experts at English Heritage
regarding Great Portland Street station.

There was a conflict between them and the 20th Century Society.
Advice and guidance from experts is only advice and guidance.

--
http://www.election.demon.co.uk
"We can also agree that Saddam Hussein most certainly has chemical and biolog-
ical weapons and is working towards a nuclear capability. The dossier contains
confirmation of information that we either knew or most certainly should have
been willing to assume." - Menzies Campbell, 24th September 2002.