Report comment

Cromwellallian yet muted messages are being issued from the RIBA, again. I would agree with Amanda Baillieu that the tone is somewhat pompous – maybe this fits the adversary but it any case it falls short of the mark. What is interesting however is Amanda Baillieu's mid sentience remark that the „scheme isn't any good“! Has there been a crit on this one yet I ask. If not then let's have one and see what we are talking about. Clearly, discussing the virtues of the Architecture is one which the investor has to remark on as Qatari Diar ( et al) are footing the bill for this programme and clearly won't bat an eyelid if it’s what they , commercial, want. I remember way back in the 1980's commenting on Canary Wharf and the Reichmann brothers efforts to re-invent Atlanta in London, which of course has been achieved! – here we argued that the planning processes had been compromised and vision put on the back-burner to achieve density and, what was seen to be, acceptable corporate architecture. What we have here is slightly different, in that the Architect is one which one would say is passionate about Urban issues and has significant accolades to be known for “good-design practice“. Equally, it may also be said the same Architect would be not so proud to admit, if it was found to be, that they have got it wrong. Maybe RSH have got it wrong, but who is to say? With such a question floating in the air it maybe that informed and layman’s opinions need to brought together on centre stage , to see if there is a need to redress the existing scheme, or , if it’s all about personal dignity and hobby-horse opinions. Personally, I am sure the Emir of Qatar is not fully equipped to lead the debate but may be well placed to appoint a champion who can be careful in setting up the agenda and vigorous in managing the players. But please, let us not have another Trafalgar square scenario.