Campaign aims to end ‘eyesore architecture’
Tuesday 16th February 2010, 2:30PM GMT.
Rob McGhee, left, and Robin Penna are out to keep developments like this one at Clifton, above, off sensitive sites. (Picture by Tom Tardif, 0916099)
A PETITION has been launched to stop ‘architectural eyesores’ being built on key sites.
Neighbours Rob and Heather McGhee and Robin and Rose Penna regard some recent developments as blots on the landscape that show the system of planning control is failing.
‘We are not against modernist buildings per se but we object to them being built on high-profile, sensitive sites,’ said Mr McGhee.
‘We want to highlight that this is exactly what is happening. We hope to start a public debate about this issue and at the same time give islanders the confidence, and hopefully a simplified procedure, to make criticisms of proposals.’
Copies of their petition will be available for signing in many independent stores.
The campaigners are citing recent developments at Clifton, St Peter Port, at La Rue de la Rocque, Torteval, and at La Rue du Hamel, Castel/St Saviour’s, to illustrate their argument.
They define an eyesore building as one of usually modern architecture, on a high-profile site, strongly visible both in the immediate area and from a distance, and which resulted in widespread criticism and condemnation.
Atelier Bas MooArc designed the properties at Torteval and Rue du Hamel.
Company architect Jamie Falla said that if the men wanted to organise a petition, they would be better putting their energies into stopping the incinerator from being built.
He did not wish to comment further.
- Read the full story in the Guernsey Press. See below for subscription details.
- To read Guernsey Press stories in full click here for subscription details. Individual editions are now available online.
Island Life
All about Guernsey
Ambassador of the Year 2011
History & Heritage
Visitor Information
Guernsey's government
Campaigns
Voice For Victims
Voice for Victims is a campaign aimed at promoting the rights of those affected by child sexual abuse.
This is Guernsey
Guernsey Press
Useful Links
Why is all this bile directed at domestic and not commercial architecture? Maybe no one is jealous of someone else’s office? These guys don’t want a ‘debate’ – they want a witch hunt. The only ‘eyesores’ in that photo have beards!
Report abuse
Wow that is an eyesore!
1. Could someone please ask the elderly gentlemen to move out of shot.
2. If the guernsey news has access to photoshop could you please remove both that nasty green netted scaffolding and the railing.
Ah … much better.
Report abuse
Just curious but are these people local or more English trying to tell a local Architect what he can and cant do to our Island
Report abuse
Uggggghhh I agree, how absolutely ghastly!
I can’t stand the juxtaposition of Rob’s contemporary multi coloured scarf against his more traditional black coat.
Something should be done.
Report abuse
Totally agree FlyingScot
The jolly green eyed monster rears it’s ugly head yet again. I wonder if these two are “local” If not and they don’t like the way we run our island, then there are flights and ferries leaving daily.
Come to think of it, wasn’t there a local deputy who was having problems coming to terms with 21st century design? I believe that a degree of facial hair was involved there also.
Maybe some form of petition to bring in legislation against facial hair is in order.
Clearly, the problem with this island is not the architecture. Its the shortage of shaving products. Address that and all will be well.
Report abuse
Personally I can’t stand the plethora of ugly 1960s box-type bungalows in ribbon development areas, but no doubt somebody will want to be preserving those as “Guernsey’s heritage” in due course.
Some of the glass-style house designs do look out of place in some of their locations, but in other locations they’d be far more palatable to many, I suspect.
When you look at the Credit Suisse building and the Regency Court and Marina Court buildings, its certainly a shame that Admiral’s Park or the Royal Bank building could not been designed on similar lines, but then everything would look the same.
But I do agree that it’s a bit rich that you can build an upside-down 100% glass 4-storey building on one piece of land, but try putting a dormer window in a fence coloured the wrong shade of brown and you’ve got no chance. Huh ?
Report abuse
Well, however much you dislike the Salvation Army building (including its signwriting) there is no need to get personal about it!
I guess the new glass fronted building will enjoy the views until the Little Theatre replacement is built. I wonder what that will look like?
There is no “Guernsey Style” just a thorough mix of Normandy, Georgian and Victorian architecture. The best of what is being built now is far better than the rubbish erected in the 50s and 60s.
Report abuse
Bogart – I take offence sir! As an “unshaven” member of the local community I must stand in the defence of my fellow bearded citizens. Our lack of shaving means we are environmentally friendly – we don’t use disposable razors that fill the Mont Cuet or electric shavers that burn electricity. Clearly the problem is with the scarf, as Mrs P pointed out – where are the fashion police! ;-)
I think the irony in all this is that the Environment Department are happy to allow the building of new glasshouses, yet won’t allow landowners to knock down the decaying ones already built – instead allowing them to fall into further disrepair. Now that’s a real eyesore!
Report abuse
*WARNING*
Xenophobia alert
Report abuse
Clearly the first four posts on this subject are from contributors who have no true love for Guernsey, care nothing about the visual beauty of Guernsey, have less character than the glass boxes themselves or are simply bent on stirring the pot. The glass edifices depicted in the photograph are, and always will be as ugly as sin ( there’s no other term for them). They have no place whatsoever in Guernsey architecture past present or future and should never have been approved. It is not ‘developers’who are wholly to blame for the rise of this ugliness ( although a smattering of integity towards Guernsey’s traditional architecture from some developers would be most welcome!) as most developers will build anything, including ugly junk, to make a profit.
Rather, it is the so-called ‘authority’ that approves such monstrosities that should be fired, locked up, never permitted ever again to ‘authorise’ anything at all in Guernsey. Better still, banish them from the island and be done with it for without ‘approval’ these pieces of sheer ugliness would never be built.
Be truly honest. Just look at the photograph! From a Guernsey architectural viewpoint those glass boxes are total rubbish resembling nothing more than one of those plastic prescription-pill boxes used to monitor what day you took which pill. Indeed they resemble the basic shape of a WW2 Nazi bunker than anything else and I applaud the two Gentlemen who are leading the effort to put a stop to any more of this ugliness being built
Report abuse
ps: re the ugly ‘glass’ buildings.
This ‘style’of characterless flat-roof building was built all over North America during the early part of the century. These buildings are ugly, they deteriorate rapidly, and they were built rectangular and flat-roofed for cheapness.
Report abuse
It doesn’t matter whether they’re English or Guernseymen, they’ve got it right. These hideous boxes are being built in sensitive areas, i.e. areas which either have heritage value and should retain their quaint character or in beauty spots where a rectangular glass box does nothing to enhance its surroundings. And I’m not jealous, I’ve got plenty of dosh, thank you very much. I just hate and despair of seeing Guernsey being debased in this way.
Report abuse
I for one will be signing their petition and would gladly go door to door with the petition. Why should these gents not protest against the monstrosities that appear unexpectedly on our landscapes. Their views represent the views of thousands in the island so good luck to them.
There is so much dreadful trash architecture popping up with no problem is alarming. The biggest offenders are the finance lot. These appalling, disgraceful buildings have destroyed Guernsey’s skyline. Still, the finance industry can build what & where it wants and there is nothing that can be done to stop them and Mr Le Noury wants to change his windows and is refused.
The comment about them not being local is laughable, what does this matter. Silly local petty mindless mentality along with the evangelical pro finance clique is destroying this forum and the island. At least they have the guts to make a stand more then can be said for some of the abusive posters on this forum.
Report abuse
Surely its somewhat redundant to organise a petition against things which by their definition must have already “…resulted in widespread criticism and condemnation”?
:|
And I have to agree with the initial posters, if they wanted examples of eyesores they’ve picked a poor example. Rotate 90 degrees right from that shot for an otherwise lovely view spoiled by a couple of (non-modern!) monstrosities.
But thats kind of the point … the fact I may think something ugly isn’t the standard for ugliness. Today’s “eyesore” is often tomorrow’s classic. I’m certainly not qualified to make that judgement, its for a planning committee and architects. Rather than ask whether these gents are local we should be asking what in particular makes them think they’re better qualified to assess aesthetics and suitability than planning and architects?
Report abuse
Pete, why won’t you give your anti-finance tirade a rest? Schroders and Butterfield are in a lovely building, but I guess in your bitter eyes the building is ugly because of it’s occupants.
Report abuse
@Roy Bisson “There is no “Guernsey Style” just a thorough mix of Normandy, Georgian and Victorian architecture. The best of what is being built now is far better than the rubbish erected in the 50s and 60s.”
Well said! And what’s this definition of “usually modern architecture, on a high-profile site, strongly visible both in the immediate area and from a distance, and which resulted in widespread criticism and condemnation”
Who says these buildings have had ‘widespread criticism’, or are on ‘high profile sites’ – other than the petition organisers. How are we to progress if everything has to be the same as everything else around it?
There is a well established, well understood process for people viewing plans and objecting before permission is granted. If people are too lazy to make use of it, then they shouldn’t blame the process for their unvoiced objections not being heard.
Report abuse
Expat80 If you feel so much about Guernsey why are you not still living here, dont tell people who still live in and love the Island what they can and cant say.
And to Pete B your continuing remarks about the finance industry is getting laughable, and where do you get that thousands of people agree with these two.
Report abuse
Unfortunately this subject is a non starter. what is ugly to some is beauty to others. personally I think the landscape has been destroyed with that awful monstrosity, it’s completely out of place, it sickens me to the bone to see it but no doubt others will love it.
Report abuse
Do you think it’s possible for a week to go by without a petition or some kind of protest march going on.
Report abuse
Peter Burtenshaw
You can’t be allowed to get away with any of that :) Line by line!
“gladly go door to door with the petition”
Please don’t; petitions shouldn’t be foisted on parishioners.
“Why should these gents not protest against the monstrosities that appear unexpectedly on our landscapes.”
Subjective and they don’t just appear. They go throug a process and the information is in the public domain
“Their views represent the views of thousands in the island so good luck to them.”
Do they? Evidence based paranoia please
“There is so much dreadful trash architecture popping up with no problem is alarming.”
Viruses are alarming, buildings should not alarm
“The biggest offenders are the finance lot. These appalling, disgraceful buildings have destroyed Guernsey’s skyline. ”
Yeah, bloody finance industry eh? Wot they ever done for us!! Hold on a minute…..you haven’t been here long have you? As an Englishman, what was wrong with the Shetlands or the Isle of Wight? No finance industry to annoy the pants off you?
“Still, the finance industry can build what & where it wants and there is nothing that can be done to stop them and Mr Le Noury wants to change his windows and is refused.”
Paranoia and conspiracies.
“The comment about them not being local is laughable, what does this matter. Silly local petty mindless ”
Oh English sage – pray tell me how my stupid inbred mind should think. Educate me! Enlighten me! You forgot that we all sleep with our sisters and Germans PB. Or are you saving that for another day?
“mentality along with the evangelical pro finance clique is destroying this forum and the island.”
OMG – the finance industry is killing the Internet now.
“At least they have the guts to make a stand more then can be said for some of the abusive posters on this forum.”
Has it occured to you that some of the posters simply don’t agree.? Doesn’t make them gutless.
This is fun :)
Report abuse
Another cause, another petition and I for one won’t be signing. Having collected signatures for one or two local petitions in the past I know just how open to abuse and unrepresentative they all are.
And even if I was a fan of petitions I wouldn’t be signing this one, which, despite their protestations, has been initiated by a couple of old fogies with a distinct anti-modernist bent.
Every single building ever erected in Guernsey was modernist in its day, from the dolmen at Dehus to Castle Cornet. As others in this thread have pointed out there is only good architecture and bad architecture and there’s a lot more good stuff going up nowadays compared to the 60s and 70s.
Report abuse
I think most posts and their authors are too caught up in some sort of ‘new is good old is bad’
syndrome.
I can’t agree that the glass fronted buildings that were the intended subject of the photo look anywhere close to attractive, i’m sure any architect worth his qualification should be able to come up with a design which would be more aesthetically pleasing and compliment the adjacent buildings in a better way than a square glass box. I’m not saying it shouldn’t have glass and be ‘old style’, but it should ‘fit in’a bit better at the very least.
I was drawing houses much like those in the photo when I was 5; I fail to see how the years of an architects training can ultimately lead to the creation of some very uninspiring boxes, glass or no glass, and I fail to see how anyone can honestly stand back and say that’s a really nice building.
However, I think the real point of the petition is to highlight the perceived failings of the planning system, not argue whether these boxes have merit as architecture.
The response from environment has been predictable, they would champion their planning system and defend the decisions made.
The real problem seems to be that, at least in a few instances, despite reasonable objection from residents and parish officials plans are still passed by some board of people who doubtless will not be affected by the development.
Surely when any planning application has raised issues then a site visit and parish officials having a large say in the decision should be the norm.
It also seems that once any application has been passed it cannot be challenged nor can the decision be reversed. So if the due process of representation prior to any decision has no effect we are stuck with the planners “expert” decision.
Look what happened in the UK in the 60′s and 70′s with the latest form of modern architecture, tower blocks, high density housing, all failed miserably as architecture and as housing.
Report abuse
Those of you with long enough memories will remember that SCFH went up at about the same time as the Credit Suisse building at the bottom of the Val des Terres. At the time there were comparisons between the two – Credit Suisse beautiful paid for by private money, RCFH horrid paid for by public money. Even back then I was relaxed about the RCFH form – it was utilitarian, quite hidden and a lot less expensive than a privately funded office block.
Government and planners are damned either way. If the politicians get involved in planning they are accused of nepotism, if planners take over the role, people accuse them of ‘destroying’ the architecture of Guernsey.
If government had has a bright granite clad sparkly Credit Suisseesque office block, they would have been hung for wasting tax payers money; because its utilitarian, they still get it in the neck.
I’m relativley relaxed about the process and, of course, whince at the odd building that goes up – but independent planners making decisions within policy guidelines has to be better than anything we had before surely?
Report abuse
What might be more productive would be to have a vote on the ten best buildings of all time in Guernsey.
Report abuse
I shouldn’t worry too much about a couple of mini carbuncles appearing.
You just wait until the Suez monster is built.
And lets hope it isn’t eh Roy!
Report abuse
Thanks God!! something is being done.. If you want more examples, take a walk around the Corbier, there are two hideous buildings out there.. I will definitely sign the petition..
Report abuse
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=pY4YKbDAZew
I wonder how much extra the Suez proposal has cost because the architects had to hedge the liable outcry from the usual suspects
Green roof technology
Echoing Vale Castle
Facilitation of Public Events
Could we have shaved off a few million without the kow-towing?
Report abuse
Diane.
Don’t get excited yet. Nothing is being done, nor will be. Its just two guys who have an opinion, to which they are of course entitled, getting themselves in the paper.
Apart from giving us something to spout about on here, nobody is realy that interested in what these guys think. People will sign their petition, but only in the same way that people will turn out to march in support of some lost cause or other, simply because they can and its something to do.
I dare say I could get supporters for my tongue in cheek suggestion for a campaign to outlaw facial hair if I pushed it.
Report abuse
Perhaps we should all wear Guernseys when in public places and read the Daily Mail as well (sounds stupid but it’s essentially the same as these jokers are suggesting). They and Al Brouard are quite simply wrong. Good design, whatever the style, is timeless and Guernsey is all the richer for “Mooarcesque” design.
Report abuse
What really annoys me is the inconsistency of the decisions made by these people, a little while ago we wanted to raise the roofline slightly on our property, we are down in a dip so it would not have made any difference to nearby properties, we were turned down flat as it was incongruous with the surroundings ( we are the only bungalow around in a road full of houses). And yet they let a glass bungalow with a flat roof go up in a field that was a quarry down at Bordeaux which is not at all in keeping with the area at all, it just does not make sense, and that is what makes people angry.These glass buildings are OK in the right place but they have to be tastefully designed and not just plonked anywhere, why anyone would want to live or work in a glass construction beats me after working in greenhouses in the blazing heat it is far too bloney warm, and yet freezing in the winter.
Report abuse
I see the knee-jerk reactions from defenders of Incongruousness are twofold:
1: from Environment – the petitioners are not well informed. Well, bless my soul, whose fault is that? When did environment last cogently explain themselves?
2: from the architect – the petitioners would be better doing something else. Hmmm.
Report abuse
Ah Mr M G the developer who has stripped the third floor of his victoria villa and replaced it with wall to wall large panes of glass. Tres moderne n’est ce pas?!!
Is that vraic I smell….
Report abuse
I’m not a huge fan of beardy blokes – or Roy Bisson (haven’t you got other more pressing matter to attend to, sir? That’s rhetorical, Roy, don’t bother responding with one of your put downs, you’ve already lost my vote, anyway) telling me how it should be, but to be fair, I think their point is being somewhat clouded in what GregR rightly describes as the ‘new is good/old is bad’ (or vice versa) debate.
I may have it wrong here, but it seems that they’re trying to say (perhaps not terribly well, or just reported badly) that the Environment Department appear inconsistent in their decisions, and that this inconsistency leads to buildings (that may well be stunning in the right locations) being plonked in areas where they simply stick out like a sore thumb…
..and the fact is, once permission is granted, those who oppose a development (invariably neighboring residents) cannot appeal that decision, which appears very one sided and unfair.
Can anyone say, hand on heart, that the glass boxes located in the centre of the photograph look well placed?
I am sure that some will, but trust me, those (individuals and companies) with enough money to build structures (such as the ones sited here) do not want – or need – your support, as thanks to their wealth and the Environment Department’s controversial vision of the future, they’re going to keep on doing it anyway.
Report abuse
mmmmmmm……..
I must admit on returning to the island i was amazed at the housing allowing that square glass house. As nice as it is, not in keeping with the area. BUT then again are the Costa del Sol flats that are along Bulwer avenue? Those are simply hideous. Or the glass flats and offices on the Bourgurd Brothers site? I would say money talks!!
Report abuse
I know, lets all go back to building mudhuts, or even better yet, dolmans as it t’is the Guernsey way!
Oh wait, no its not, im Guernsey and it certainly isnt my way. Hopefully one day I will be able to afford to build a massive steel and glass house on the roundabout in town – and sit in my lounge and flip the bird at all ye olde mockers hahaha!
Report abuse
Scarlett – you HAVE got it right!
Report abuse
I think the glass boxes in the pic are well placed, it is the scruffy tired looking buildings around them that are making it look bad.
Report abuse
I personally don’t think those buildings are an eyesore. Reason? I actually had to do a double-take to find out exactly what they were moaning about! They don’t exactly stick out like a sore thumb, do they?
PS Bogart – the beard stays my friend, petition or no petition! ;-)
Report abuse
Arrived in GSY 30+ years ago. Really excited cos travel books all said that the arrival to St P P was one of the most incredible back drops anywhere in the world! How so true then, and how so untrue now. Just look at the roof of the new court building as you approach from sea .. ugh!
Report abuse
Now that we’ve all had our outbursts and are retreating to lick our wounds I can only think of one abiding truth/consolation in the sorry tale of the degradation of Guernsey’s architecture, and that is that the carbuncles will one day, not in our lifetime but nevertheless one day BE TAKEN DOWN! and hopefully by then there will be architects around who possess a bit more intelligence and appreciation of how a beautiful building SHOULD look.
Report abuse
Quite right Matti, in 100 years time we’ll all be living in dolmens ;-)
Report abuse
Friday morning.
Forgot that the schools are out so hardly any traffic on the roads.
Had a quarter of an hour to spare so parked up at the Model Yacht Pond.
Oh dear those glass boxes do look incongruous and there appears to be a large empty plot immediately to the South of them.What’s in store there I wonder?
Also noticed that the sea of bright green roofs around the bottom of St Julian’s Avenue tend to clash with their surroundings.
Report abuse
I am 100% confident that there is overwhelming support for these two gents and I will go door to door to get these petitions signed.
Report abuse
i do agree that the idc or what ever name they care to use are so inconsistant its unreal a member of my family had a shed burnt down an was refused permision to replace it .someone from the department then surgested that if they could not do what they would have liked to be done that they could not aford they propity it was not a choose to have the shed rnt down by some idiot other family members have been told not inkeping with the area hellall they wanted to do was remove some old railings an replace them in stone same as evry other house in the road . just seems if the face fits .
young people that want to build a house for family dont get permision yet to build a block of flats no problems we dont want to live in rabbit hucth’s to bring up our chiildren .
yes i am a born an bred an cant afford a place to buy to bring up family.
rant over bet wedont get any where mind you .
Report abuse
Today’s front page story can only enable one conclusion to be drawn. Our elections are irrelevant. It simply doesn’t matter who gets elected. This island is not run by our politicians at all. It is clearly run by unelected, unaccountable and uncontrollable civil servants. It seems that every major States department is riddled with this disease.
Its high time that the island gets to grip with the problem. Its becoming more obvious every month that what was perceived to be a large problem has become a massive problem.
Can anyone please tell me to whom our senior civil servants report in line management terms ? Who carries out their annual appraisals ? What performance benchmarks are they being measured against ? What procedures are in place for when they fall short of expected standards ?
Guernsey today is run by independent silos, not by our elected deputies. At least we know who the deputies are…the all-too-powerful civil servants are totally anonymous and we taxpayers are paying their salaries. I for one am not at all happy out that. At least I get the chance to vote deputies in or out (sort of). But they are NOT the ones running the island so why bother voting at all ?
Come on Policy Council members – time to show some leadership and regain control of the island from the civil service.
Report abuse
Reading the new Planning Law beards are exempt as long as they are under 20 square metres in area are not visible from the highway and are less than 4 metres in height.
If in doubt the advice is to fill in a Pre Application Enquiry form.
I got rid of my fuzz years ago.
Report abuse
All that we can really hope for is that one day architects will find out how to draw curves on their CAD system – and start using the facility
Report abuse
who cares i would like to live in any of those buildings.Probably very warm and full of natural light .
Stop worrying about next door and enjoy your self
Report abuse
@ John:
I notice you wrote your English bashing post in, erm, English!
Report abuse
What are these protesters on about! if you take there argument to a logical regression we should all be living in caves!
Some of the modern houses and architecture are not up my street, some I like. If Gaudi had designed buildings in Guernsey, I’m sure these plebs would have been complaining.
personally I think part of the issue stems back to the restrictive planning of the 70′s and 80s where if it didn’t look like a Playschool childs drawing with heres roof, heres the door and windows 1, 2, 3 & 4 it wasn’t approved. Now the island has permitted modern (what ever that means) current architecture we are missing the link that the current architecture of the 70s and 80s would have given.
Good architecture will stay and poor will be demolished and rebuilt over time, that is why we aren’t living in caves anymore.
Report abuse
Paul,
A vast amount of the housing stock, particularly in Town, is of picture-postcard, universally proportioned, Georgian decent. These irate people aren’t concerned about our caves – The ones we’ve found are protected by the environment dept after all. ;)
Secondly, Gaudi. His buildings are great – They’re vast swirling exercises which befit a city, a particular art movement, and one particular man. While we’re at it – they have physically endured because they aren’t glass and steel- they’re stone and plaster! Their “organic” nature makes the odd bit of moss or crumbling brickwork look “in place” so I agree with you. I too don’t see what the average pleb in Barcelona would complain about. On the flipside, The Town Church is not the Sagrada Familia, and I’m quite happy it isn’t, as I’m not Catalan. As much as Gaudi belongs to the Catalans, “Georgian-seaside” is ours – why not embrace it? :)
Thirdly – have you really thought that hard about why it seems the IDC didn’t allow that much 70s/80s residential architecture? Back then we actually had politicians either untouched or unphased by the hand of finance, uber-wealth and “all that glitters”. I think they were simply more prepared to put their hands up and say “sorry Mr Architect, you’ll just have to try harder – this is St Saviours not St Tropez!”
Lastly – a playschool child might be able to draw roof, windows, etc, but I think you’re under-egging what even our best-known architects would have had to learn about at Architects College. Georgian proportion isn’t an accident, its congruous throughout buildings of the age, and follows certain rules. It’s these simple rules that are being broken to massage the ego/wallet of the odd individual at the detriment to the island as a whole. Still not getting it? If you stuck miniature versions of the Sagrada Familia, the Empire state, The Pompidou centre in Paris, and St. Paul’s cathedral in downtown St. P.P., despite their undeniable architectural acclaim you’d get the ugly chimera of a place that we’re walking to as an island. Is that not the true “logical regression” of the argument?
Report abuse
Jackie – I’m glad to read that my beard complies with planning regulations, although I’m saddened that ZZ Top will no longer be able to play a gig here!
Report abuse
RT2 thanks for your thoughts, you too seem to have missed the point ;) Yes Georgian architecture has lines and rules, so does Classical music, that doesn’t make modern music bad. Oh and don’t say that you wouldn’t play modern music over a classical piece.
I would suggest that there was dismay, decent, complaint etc from the greeks when the first Doric columns were put up, and then again when the first corinthian columns were put up. they did match what was there, what had gone before. You done hear people raising complaints that Corinthian columns don’t fit in with their surroundings where ever they are.
My point is just that due to the stifuling of architecture perviously we do not have a progression. I suppose that you think that the Louvre extension by Pei, Lloyds building by Rogers and Foster Gherkin are all eyesores.
What I would like to know which buildings in the above photo are good architecture in the petitioners opinion (excluding the town church)? It could be that it is the whole appearance, in which case, if the house is such an eye sore why has it taken so long for people to realise that it is there!
At the end of the day the Planners are never going to be able to please all, as we are all different, we all like and dislike different things. all they can hope to do is permit examples of good architecture that will add to the scene, or pass bland architecture that blends in so much that no one notices.
Report abuse
RT2 – the rules you mention are the Golden Section based on the Fibonacci series of numbers (look it up on wiki). The Golden Section applies to everything not just Georgian architecture. Please don’t assume that modern architecture does not adhere to the rules, just perhaps not your rules.
Report abuse
I am a student of Architecture and I love this island, I really do. But I am forever having my doubts about whether I would want to work here.
As an Architect I would want to be innovative, creative, a designer. I do not want to immitate what has gone before which in my opinion isn’t all that great anyway. There are some beauties, full of character but all in all what was built in the past is aesthetically dull.
It is all a matter of opinion.
Report abuse