Morning:
8°c
Architects urged to boycott design for Chelsea barracks
Will Hurst and David Rogers18 Jun 2009
Leading architects are being urged to boycott the Chelsea barracks scheme following the row over Prince Charles's intervention in the design.
Developer Qatari Diar will shortly ask architects if they wish to submit alternatives to Lord Rogers's abandoned steel-and-glass design.
But following the call by Lord Rogers for a national inquiry into the Prince's role in the saga, Labour MP Ken Purchase has tabled a Commons Early Day Motion calling on the Royal Institute of British Architects to implement a boycott.
Mr Purchase said he was dismayed by the "undemocratic" scrapping of the Rogers plan and said architects should not work for Qatari Diar unless it performed a U-turn, Building Design magazine reports this week.
Jack Pringle, the former Riba president, said Qatari Diar's approach to architects would represent a "real test" of their integrity.
"If I was still [Riba president] I would ask members not to supplant Rogers," he told Building Design.
"There is a serious issue here about the Prince's tendency to interfere in a powerful and undemocratic way - I think this is an abuse of his position."
Riba president Sunand Prasad said he could not "instruct" members about potential commissions but added: "I would not enter a competition to replace an architect in these circumstances."
Reader views (15)
God, do all architects whinge this much? Theirs seems to be the only art form that can't handle any critic that isn't positive. If you dislike modern architecture you're either tagged backward (as Charles has been) or ignored (as those who fought to prevent the Rogers design were) or you're told that since you didn't complete 7 years of schooling on the subject you're unable to have any say whatsoever. Only the art form of architecture is this close minded and nasty towards its critics. I'm a painter, I think next time someone wants to express their ideas on my work I'll say, "you just aren't smart enough to get it so hush." Afterall that's what architects have been doing for decades.
- Shannen, SatSuma USA, 21/06/2009 00:57
Report abuse
Let them have their boycott. And let them have their enquiry!
Prince Charles wrote one letter. A letter that probably echoed the views of many Londoners. A quite "democratic" letter!
Meanwhile RIBA should scuttle off and remove the 'R' from their name.
- Charlie, London, 19/06/2009 10:41
Report abuse
The likely result of HRH The Prince of Wales's intervention is a timid debased so-called 'classical'
scheme similar to the developers 'georgian' seen at
Poundbury.
- \Louis Billerey, London, 19/06/2009 08:00
Report abuse
I agree that HRH is right,this development like many in this city are not in keeping with the surroundings or its people Lord Rodgers and his profession have a lot to answer for, many buildings are eye sores ugly mismatched and downright wrong and do nothing for the area HRH had no choice it was stop the current scheme or ruin the area for ever no contest.
- Jj Regan, LONDON UK, 18/06/2009 23:24
Report abuse
I wasn't that convince by the ,usually excellent, Rogers' scheme. However, I am more concerned with Prince Chuck touting a mediocrity like Quinlan Terry.
I love good modern architecture and I also like good classical architecture. Terry's work is flaccid in the extreme. Given the wealth of precedent available to him, I'm amazed by how weak his work is. He is hardly in the same all park as the likes of John Vanbrugh, Alexander Thomson and Christopher Wren who have done the hard work for him.
- Col, London, 18/06/2009 18:00
Report abuse
Rodgers needs to retire his design are just 50s communist failed crap in a new setting. Rodgers are the ideas of an old bitter man. Go now. Keep up the great work Charles. Thank you for saving this part of London from another communist tpye 50s building
- Tony, london. uk, 18/06/2009 16:54
Report abuse
I'm sure a new design by Lord Rogers would be considered if it were not merely commercial but took account of local opinion and more up-to-date thinking on sustainability.
- Nick, London, 18/06/2009 16:01
Report abuse
I'd like a 'national inquiry' as to how the Upper House, which used to be full inoffensive Old Boys up from the country for a night on the town and a free sherry got turned over to a lot of arrogant, egotistical, politically-loaded pocket-lining cronies like 'Lord Rogers of Riverside' - but I don't suppose I'll get one!
In an unfair world the British public didn't get a say in whether it wanted an unfair system that had worked for a thousand years to be traded in over-night for an even unfairer one. I guess life's just unfair, m'Lud.
- Roz, France, 18/06/2009 15:44
Report abuse
Lord Rogers or whatever he calls hiself should shut up Prince Charles is right, Prince Charles gets lots of letters from the public asking for his help and besides there should be a design of buildings that are in keeping with the Chelsea Hospital. Had this been in a village a modern design such as that would not have been allowed purely because it would not have been in keeping with the area so why should Rogers be any different. The people who live round that area their views are ignored by such as him it is the same old story about Labour just bang things through no need to ask people who in the end have to pay for it. We should build a monstrosity outside his house and see how he likes it. Besides a building like that who is going to clean the glass or have they got eastern europeans coming in for that. That would not surprise me. the building he has designed is an eyesore
- Jacqui Williams, peterborough cambs, 18/06/2009 15:30
Report abuse
Oh my God what a hissy fit! Prince Charles has done nothing but stand up for the residents against Rogers' egotistical and unsympathetic design by simply writing a letter, and good for him! Who do these people think the are - a boycott (although if there are any other plans like Rogers' this might actually be a good result for London)!?
- Ken Joralemon, london, UK, 18/06/2009 14:50
Report abuse
This is turning out to be an unbelievably immature hissy fit on the part of the architect fraternity and may they fail in their attempts to intimidate Prince Charles who has done a wonderful job in bringing sanity to new buildings in our cities.
- Bingham Macnamara, lymington, hampshire, 18/06/2009 13:37
Report abuse
I don't understand. The property belongs to the Qataris, the money is theirs and HRH suggested to them that the Roger's project was not appropriate and has it has turned out highly unpopular.
Now the Republicans and the left are showing their autocratic colours!!!!
- Peter Glazier, Sao Paulo. Brazil, 18/06/2009 12:28
Report abuse
What Chris said.
- Nikolai, East Grinstead, 18/06/2009 10:40
Report abuse
Toys. Pram. Pathetic. Architects - get over yourselves. The public clearly disliked the previous design hugely. A boycott will merely reinforce perceptions that your profession is populated by prima donnas who can't bear anyone disagreeing with them.
- Ken, Brighton, East Sussex, 18/06/2009 10:30
Report abuse
What is this nonsense about Charles' interference being "undemocratic".
Whatever you think of the issues and Rogers' design, the decision on whose design to use is nothing to do with democracy - it is the developer's *commercial* decision to make (subject to planning approval), and if they wish to be influenced by Charles, that is their choice.
- Chris, Peterborough, 18/06/2009 09:54
Report abuse
