Prince Charles should keep out of individual building projects and focus on promoting the wider goal of sustainable development, the President of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) said on Tuesday. Prince Charles should keep out of individual building projects and focus on promoting the wider goal of sustainable development, the President of the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA) said on Tuesday.
... "There is a market in ideas here ... The intervention in individual projects by somebody with enormous influence and power but who is not actually accountable to the public is not the way to make such a market in ideas flow," RIBA President Sunand Prasad told Reuters in an interview.Reuters
That's the news story? "Prince Charles a Royal Pain in the Ass?" The story linked to doesn't say that.
But there's another anti-Charles campaign on. This one is most likely led by Baron Richard "Bully Boy" Rogers after his Chelsea Barracks bollocking. Since public sympathy was with Charles there, any Starchitects involved are staying behind the scenes however. What cowards.
An ideologue at the Guardian who poses as a reporter has written a series of negative articles about Charles in the last week. In one, he dug up a four-year-old letter that no one paid attention to - the building was built, without the public realizing Charles had said anything. That didn't stop the pseudo-reporter from trying to make the situation sound drastic.
In another article he found a series of Poundury residents who said that Poundbury's not perfect - imagine that, British people complaining about something! The fact that 86% of the residents like Poundbury only made it into the last sentence. Perhaps the reporter should survey the workers at the Lloyds Tower to see what they think.
As a British citizen, Charles has a constitutional right to comment on planning issues in which he has no legal jurisdiction and no financial stake. Starchitects are upset because his comments resonate with the majority of British residents.
i thought the public concern with Chelsea Barracks was due to it's massing, and the lack of infrastruture to support such project, not the vernacular used...
also, i agree that he has the right to comment on planning issues, but since he is "prince charles" he is no ordinary citizen, and has the responsibility to measure his influence (again, the influence of the crown, intended or not) on his personal opinions/comments. the fact that he narrows in on the vernacular issue is what bothers me...
He did not narrow in on the vernacular issue. The short list of planners includes offices that are not traditional, and the developers, not Charles,will choose the planner.
The planning brief, not Charles, called for masonry buildings 6 stories high or less. Rogers designed glass and steel buildings 8 stories high.
The Deputy Mayor of London wrote:
What a relief! An act of large-scale vandalism has been averted. London should be grateful to the Qataris for their wisdom in turning away from yet another glass and steel disaster. It is my fervent hope that the developers will now work on a proposal that enhances and embraces Chelsea and the Royal Hospital.
This decision should mark a turning point in development in the capital. No more concrete, no more glass and steel. Brick and stone and slate must be the way forward, so that in 100 years time Londoners will still recognise their own city.
It is perfectly possible for modern architecture to embrace ancient materials and proportions without being pastiche. We hope that the developers will find a new architect who has the skills to produce something truly beautiful that will form part of London's third world heritage site in years to come.