![]() |
Posted by: Vernon Mount, Newcastle on 2:29pm Mon 3 Mar 08 What a shrill this whitewashed article causes...there is no GPO building left on that site...it is like the skin of a snake left discarded as no longer of use...to become a piece of stage set for the frivolous comic tampering by the developers in their continouse efforts to undermine under resourced conservation bodies. What would Frank Worsdale say of his city today? We thought we had won these battles. The developers of our generation will be viewed by posterity with the same resentment as the planners and architects of the post-war period. Do we not realise how much we have lost of what was one of the greatest urban experiences in Europe. We have seen the building line of numerous classically influenced buildings being eroded by greed. The parapet of this facade should be sacrosanct. After a similar dismall intervention to roof of the former County Buildings, what hope for Egyptian Halls when it is eventually saved...we hope! Posted by: Steven Glaswegian, Edinburgh (Unfortunatley!) on 4:28pm Mon 3 Mar 08 Moan, moan, moan! Maybe the GPO building should have been left to rot or just demolished completley. Cities change and have to evolve as do buildings and their uses. I daresay it is probably costing the developers a hell of alot more to save the shell of the GPO than it would to clear the site and build from scratch. So if adding some extra floors can allay the cost of facade retention then so be it. These companies are in business to make money. If they weren't then we would have lost a hell of alot more of 'what was one of the greatest urban experiences in Europe'! Posted by: Ian, Glasgow on 4:41pm Mon 3 Mar 08 Steven Glaswegian wrote:Well said Steven - people are never happy! I think the new building will look great, I just wish they'd hurry up and finish it. It seems to have been in that state for ages and ages and ages..... yawn Posted by: Whatever, Wherever on 5:53pm Mon 3 Mar 08 Ian wrote:I'll go with you two. Posted by: Vernon Mount, Newcastle on 1:27pm Tue 4 Mar 08 I'm glad to see the developers have such good friends among the citizens of Glasgow. I think you'll find the GPO WAS left to rot! The reason for any additional costs to be recouped is in part due to Stefan King sitting on the building and undertaking no redevelopment work and little or no maintenance doubling his money in the process. Developers owning listed buildings have a legally binding duty to keep them in good state of repair. In this case someone managed to make a substantial profit whilst do nothing for the building. Local Authorities do not have the financial might to enforce through the courts and developers know this very well. Every city needs developers, but they must also display some level altruism toward the city in which they invest. Posted by: Vernon Mount, Newcastle on 1:38pm Tue 4 Mar 08 Developers have proven to be highly adept at demolishing listed buildings. Take for example the two warehouses, Thompson in influence at least, on Bell Street and Watson Street. They are now a memory and the site redevloped, why? It ensured greater profit to the developers to permit the building to rot beyond salvation rather than be saved. Glasgow continues to lose a far greater percentage of its historic building stock than almost any other major city in the country. Your comments would be better placed supporting these vulnerable edifices...the developer will survive regardless. Anyone unaware of how much has been lost should look to virutualmitchell.com
. As Worsdale said, The City that Disappeared. | ||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| Copyright © 2009 Newsquest (Herald & Times) Limited. All
Rights Reserved Terms of Use |
|