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 20th Century Society seems to be the latest Gavin Stamp enterprise.
He seems to have moved on from the Victorians since I knew him.

--
Colin Rosenstiel

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.

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 23:41:37 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:


And how would that help the travelling public - your electors?

It doesn't.

The
application was actually trying to recreate the original look of the
tiling, which is currently a mixture of original vitreous enamel and
later ceramic tiles, some quite modern. It would revitalise a "tired
public transport facility" in the words of your officers.

Proof if any were necessary of the ridiculously arbitrary and subjective
nature of the listing process.

No building under 100 years old should be listed period.



Your decision appears vindictive to me.

Of course it is. Did you expect anything better from pettyfogging
officialdom.


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.

On Mon, 07 Aug 2006 23:41:37 GMT, "Richard J."
wrote:

David Boothroyd wrote:

As it is now not possible to put the original tiles back, this
normally means that whoever was responsible for removing them gets
prosecuted for damaging a listed building without permission.

And how would that help the travelling public - your electors? The
application was actually trying to recreate the original look of the
tiling, which is currently a mixture of original vitreous enamel and
later ceramic tiles, some quite modern. It would revitalise a "tired
public transport facility" in the words of your officers. Your decision
appears vindictive to me. What do you actually want LU and Metronet to
do now?

I think the issue here is that the authorities or bodies with
responsibility for making these judgments don't give a damn what LU or
Metronet do provided they do as they are told. Cost is also not a
concern for those issuing their judgments - the listing of the Thames
Tunnel being a great example of how to multiply the cost of a project
several fold.

While I admire good architecture [1] and think that there is much on the
LU network that is worthy of retention and careful and appropriate
restoration I know from personal experience how unbelievable it can get
in dealing with local authorities and English Heritage.

While I don't know the facts in this case concerning removal of the
tiles I can clearly recall an old memo (in the years after the Kings
Cross fire when there was a lot of Fire Precautions work undertaken)
that made clear the consequences of working without proper consent on
listed buildings. This is the sort of thing that really should not
happen given LU's past experience in this area.

[1] an entirely subjective matter I accept.

--
Paul C


Admits to working for London Underground!

On Thu, 10 Aug 2006 21:29:21 +0100, Paul Corfield
wrote:


As it is now not possible to put the original tiles back, this
normally means that whoever was responsible for removing them gets
prosecuted for damaging a listed building without permission.

And how would that help the travelling public - your electors? The
application was actually trying to recreate the original look of the
tiling, which is currently a mixture of original vitreous enamel and
later ceramic tiles, some quite modern. It would revitalise a "tired
public transport facility" in the words of your officers. Your decision
appears vindictive to me. What do you actually want LU and Metronet to
do now?

I think the issue here is that the authorities or bodies with
responsibility for making these judgments don't give a damn what LU or
Metronet do provided they do as they are told. Cost is also not a
concern for those issuing their judgments.

Exactly, which is why unaccountable quangos stuffed with worthies should
not be in a position to implement and enforce what are entirely subjective
judgments.

That decision should ultimately be borne by those who end up paying for it.

- the listing of the Thames
Tunnel being a great example of how to multiply the cost of a project
several fold.

Never mind the opportunity cost of putting a transport artery out of action
for far longer than expected.

Bishopsgate goodsyard being another example of EH's unaccountable
interference.


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:

Bishopsgate goodsyard being another example of EH's unaccountable
interference.

I'm currently working for the company which persuaded the local
council to give permission for its redevelopment.

--
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.