3 ms·
These should only be legal if that facade is integrated into the new building, not just a mask in front it. Yes, it's more work for the architects but otherwise
by close04 7y ago
These should only be legal if that facade is integrated into the new building, not just a mask in front it. Yes, it's more work for the architects but otherwise it defeats the whole point of the exercise.
- Reason077 7y agoAs a Londoner, I agree. Generally, I don't have any problem with historic facades being integrated into modern buildings so long as it's done well. Some of these examples, where the building was built behind the historic facade with no attempt to integrate it at all, are apppaling and should never have been allowed. The developers of these projects took advantage of loopholes in planning laws. In other examples from the article, like the College East, Wentworth Street (Spitalfields E1) example, the historic facade has now been perfectly integrated into the new development. In fact, it is a huge improvement on what it looked like before: https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5170618,-0.0722792,3a,75y,131.01h,104.42t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sIJJrCtUYxcnZWeTHbicNkQ!2e0!7i16384!8i8192 https://www.google.com/maps/@51.5170618,-0.0722792,3a,75y,13... (I cycle along this street every day!)