Should people stay longer than they wish to, at anything nowadays, that is a question? I like my friends to be able to come and go at anything I do, be it film or art, or even a party. I think then they are happy.
Anyway I am still saving or trying to save EARL's Court from destruction. I think differently about the site than the developer's or even the residences. I see no problem in re development of sites that are unattractive but do see a problem in destroying work of reputable architects. C.Howard Crane, built Detroit. For very little money at the time, he built Earl's Court, a conference centre, which has catered to over 40,000 people at a time for many years, feeding central London. I would agree that the shops in the area and some of the buildings are not attractive. I can see that it is valuable land to build on, we are short of properties. However, to replace this would be a crying shame for all those living in the area. Who would buy the properties, are there going to be charitable trusts to rehouse people, who cannot afford properties?. Will they go to original occupiers? Or, are they going to go to investors from abroad?
After all disruption will last for at least 15 years. We should know exactly what is going to happen with clarity and honesty and be part of the programme? I am a huge advocate of contemporary architecture when it is done well, I love it, and am not keen on Edwardian architecture, red brick and dull. However, some people are, and we should give them the respect, and help them fight. Some buildings should go, but not this one. Could we not keep the facade, working around a greater architect's previous work?
This painting done by Duggie Fields, artist and creator, has been fighting for months to save it. Please see the building with new eyes. It will have some tall building made of glass shortly if we do not fight to save it.
Anyway I am still saving or trying to save EARL's Court from destruction. I think differently about the site than the developer's or even the residences. I see no problem in re development of sites that are unattractive but do see a problem in destroying work of reputable architects. C.Howard Crane, built Detroit. For very little money at the time, he built Earl's Court, a conference centre, which has catered to over 40,000 people at a time for many years, feeding central London. I would agree that the shops in the area and some of the buildings are not attractive. I can see that it is valuable land to build on, we are short of properties. However, to replace this would be a crying shame for all those living in the area. Who would buy the properties, are there going to be charitable trusts to rehouse people, who cannot afford properties?. Will they go to original occupiers? Or, are they going to go to investors from abroad?
After all disruption will last for at least 15 years. We should know exactly what is going to happen with clarity and honesty and be part of the programme? I am a huge advocate of contemporary architecture when it is done well, I love it, and am not keen on Edwardian architecture, red brick and dull. However, some people are, and we should give them the respect, and help them fight. Some buildings should go, but not this one. Could we not keep the facade, working around a greater architect's previous work?
This painting done by Duggie Fields, artist and creator, has been fighting for months to save it. Please see the building with new eyes. It will have some tall building made of glass shortly if we do not fight to save it.
No comments:
Post a Comment