4 C O N T E X T 1 4 1 : S E P T E M B E R 2 0 1 5 ‘THE CURRENT proposals for the refurbishment and upgrading of neighbouring No 1 Finsbury Avenue show that these buildings can be adapted and upgraded sympathetically without destroying their special architectural character. ‘We urge the building owners to follow their own example and treat No 2 Finsbury Avenue with the same considered approach. Demolition of such a recent high-quality building would be a needless waste of resources, and further chip away at the architectural integrity and uniformity of the wider Broadgate development.’ A spokesperson for the Twentieth Century Society telling the Architects’ Journal why it has opposed a move by British Land to seek immunity from listing for part of the 1980s Broadgate development. ‘PEOPLE fancy a heritage item in their garden so are more inclined to seek an illegitimate means of supply. Behind the scenes there is this second-hand market. I don’t know if they get stolen to order but somehow they end up in America and places like that.’ AndrewYoung, chairman of the Letter Box Study Group, joining Royal Mail and Historic England in calling for post boxes to be protected and preserved. ‘THE FACADES of precast concrete elements act as screens that negotiate between the private sphere of the individual flats and the collective space of the inner garden and beyond. The rhythmic composition of vertical fins and horizontal “streets-in-theair” articulates the Smithsons’ unique proposition of an architectural language that combines social values with modern technology and material expression. ‘Despite the current state of neglect and abuse, Robin Hood Gardens comprises a rare, majestic gesture, both radical and generous in its aspiration for an architecture of human association.’ Dirk van den Heuvel of Delft University quoted by Richard Rogers and Simon Smithson in support of their call for the listing of Robin Hood Gardens, the housing project designed by Alison and Peter Smithson. ‘WE ARE singularly failing the poor. A high household income gives you better access to beautiful surroundings. This inequality has a significant impact on health and wellbeing as well as the way people behave within communities. ‘Those who are surrounded by beauty are more likely to take care of it, become more involved in their communities. Uglier places see higher levels of antisocial behaviour, crime and more litter. We have to create a system by which we all have a Right to Beauty... ‘We demand that the word Beauty, and all that it magically means, are equitably woven through our planning system, our architecture and our built world.’ Caroline Julian of ResPublica calling for ‘a community right to beauty’. ‘I NEVER really understood why we had two organisations doing much the same thing. Now the combined memberships of all the County Gardens Trusts — all that knowledge and enthusiasm — can be merged with the specialist expertise and academic clout of the old Garden History Society to become much more effective not just in conservation but in actively campaigning to protect our designed landscapes.’ Dominic Cole, first president of the Gardens Trust, formed by a merger of the Garden History Society and the Association of Garden Trusts. ‘OUR POLICY brings some muchneeded sanity to the mega-basement mania and finds the proper balance between subterranean development and the right of the rest of the community to the peaceful enjoyment of their homes.’ Councillor Timothy Coleridge of the London Borough of Kensington and Chelsea defending the council’s planning policy on basements.The policy had been challenged unsuccessfully in the High Court by property developer Zipporah Lisle-Mainwaring, who had painted red and white stripes (which she has since been ordered to remove) on her townhouse in protest at her neighbours, who had objected to her plans. ‘PROUDLY read SPAB 1877 manifesto aloud to students in the beautiful medieval interior of Great Coxwell Barn today. Fab.’ Ayla Lepine on Twitter @heartchitecture ‘THIS IS a victory for local democracy – and for common sense. Ignoring its own officers’ advice and the opinion of Historic England, members of Tower Hamlets planning committee have rejected a scheme that is too big for its sensitive historic site and which would destroy far too much of the conservation area for which it is proposed. ‘No members of the planning committee supported the scheme and British Land should now listen to the people of Tower Hamlets – whose desire has been expressed through their elected councillors on the committee – and redesign a scheme that was condemned as too greedy and too destructive. ‘The Spitalfields Trust accepted British Land’s initial invitation to work with them to produce an acceptable scheme. But the trust found its observations, criticism and advice constantly ignored. It had no choice but to go into direct opposition and, in consequence, produced – with John Burrell – an alternative scheme for the site.’ Architectural historian and broadcaster Dan Cruickshank welcoming the decision of Tower Hamlets Council to reject plans to redevelop the Norton Folgate area.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy MjgyMjA=