National Theatre Vs Southbank Centre Redevelopment
Posted 04 July 2013 - 07:42 AM
The artist's impressions all look very nice, but artists can make anything look nice, can't they? The plans just haven't been thought through, or more importantly, haven't been thought through with the whole of the Southbank 'team'. The NT, RFH, Hayward etc need to sit down together and come up with something which will work for all of them, and clearly they haven't. It's like they all just went off, came up with their own thing, and submitted their planning applications. The NT's has gone through, we wait on the RFH. I can see why the RFH wants to redevelop... similar reasons to the NT no doubt.... but their massive glass box + other things is clearly not the way about it. it seems to segregate the whole area. It's already an architectural mish mash and overbuilt. Everyone did their own thing, and are still doing that.
Posted 04 July 2013 - 09:43 AM
There's some public confusion about the separate identities of the arts organisations on the South Bank:
1) Southbank Centre, which has submitted this planning application, is one single organisation: "Southbank Centre occupies a 21-acre site in the midst of London’s vibrant cultural quarter on the South Bank of the Thames. Southbank Centre includes Royal Festival Hall, Queen Elizabeth Hall, Purcell Room, the Hayward Gallery, and the Saison Poetry Library. As well as these venues, there are restaurants, cafes, bars and shops to enjoy."
2) The NT is a separate organisation.
3) The National Film Theatre is part of the British Film Institute, which is a third separate organisation, The NFT was plonked between Southbank Centre and the NT. The NT's objections to the current planning application by Southbank Centre make some references to the earlier effect on the NT of the NFT building.
Posted 04 July 2013 - 11:06 AM
Posted 04 July 2013 - 11:15 AM
Nice to see Pn2 that you agree with me; I often feel I am howling at the moon ( or moaning a lot to nearest person) the Southbank area and thanks HG for clarifying the organisations there, must be developed as a whole. And access to the river bank, views of the river and integration of areas should be priorities.
Posted 04 July 2013 - 11:15 AM
I'm really glad that both English Heritage and The national have come down on the dissenting side.
It really felt like a steamroller before.
Posted 04 July 2013 - 11:46 AM
Southbank Centre's Executive Director has directly responded to the NT's, quite different, objections (also supported by EH) by insisting that the planned overshadowing extension "will provide a vibrant and welcoming face and much-improved connections to the National Theatre, BFI Southbank and beyond." He doesn't explain in exactly what sense making a currently open route inaccessible after dark is a "much-improved connection." And he ignores the NT's objection that the planned extension's "vibrant and welcoming [in-your-]face" will block off the view of the NT from one side.
Posted 04 July 2013 - 01:54 PM
- a bit more in-depth than the WoS article.
I’m all for the skateboarders and I’m also for each organisation to remain their individual identity. Wasn’t it Lord Rogers who proposed to put a giant glass wave over the different sites in time for the Millennium? Thankfully Denys Lasdun objected and saved the day. What I really like about London’s architectural style is the constant varying styles which many other European cities can’t claim to have.
I’ve only seen a few pictures of the development and I quite like it and I’m for it. Two neighbors fighting over an extension and that has the potential to block daylight is little like a scene from an Acknborn! Seriously though, The RFH site does need some serious development to bring it all together. I'm sure the access routes to the NT can be refigured as at the moment they manky. AND the NT will still function brilliantly with a bit less light and the views of Big Ben.
Broadway has been very good to me. But then, I've been very good to broadway.
0 user(s) are reading this topic
0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users