01/02/2008

Matar a galinha dos ovos de ouro!

Lisboa tal como Londres tem os mesmos problemas!



"We may not only be destroying our heritage, but killing the goose that lays the golden egg" Principe Carlos de Inglaterra


Charles does it again: skyscraper boom a rash of carbuncles, he tells architects
Towers risk vandalising heritage sites across the country, prince says Robert Booth In Guardian UnlimitedFriday February 1, 2008


Prince Charles locked horns with Lord Rogers and the architects of Britain's skyscraper boom yesterday, warning that historic cities are at risk of being wrecked by a "rash" of "carbuncles" in the form of office and apartment towers.
In a speech backed by a slide show which highlighted Rogers's proposed 44-storey "cheese grater" tower next to Lord Foster's so-called "gherkin" in the City of London, the prince complained that architects were indulging in a "free for all [that] will leave London and our other cities with a pockmarked skyline".
The address to heritage activists, architects and developers at St James's Palace put the prince on collision course with the Labour peer, who is also the chief architecture adviser to the London mayor, Ken Livingstone.
Rogers built Lloyd's of London, one of the most eye-catching towers on the capital's skyline, and made high-rise living a plank of government urban policy with his Urban Taskforce report to the Blair government. He has spoken out in favour of clusters of towers and is constructing tall buildings on the World Trade Centre site in New York and at Canary Wharf.
The prince said Bath and Edinburgh were also under threat from such towers and suggested skyscrapers in London should be confined to Canary Wharf, "rather than overshadowing Wren's and Hawksmoor's churches". Rogers, who has clashed with the prince in the past, was on business in Korea yesterday and declined to comment.
The prince's comments echoed his famous 1984 speech when he described a planned extension to the National Gallery as "a monstrous carbuncle" - shredding confidence in modern architecture - and said the skyscraper boom would result in "not just one carbuncle on the face of a much-loved friend, but a positive rash of them that will disfigure precious views and disinherit future generations of Londoners".
Yesterday he showed an image of a 160 metre tower by the Argentinian architect Raphael Viñoly close to the Tower of London as an example of a scheme that could "deliberately desecrate" a World Heritage site.
The speech also represented an attack on Livingstone's liberal policy towards buildings in the capital where at least a dozen skyscrapers are planned. They include the 64-storey "Helter-Skelter" in the City designed by Kohn Pedersen Fox, Ian Simpson's 52-storey Jumeirah tower on the South Bank and Renzo Piano's 66-storey Shard of Glass, also known as the London Bridge Tower. Even the prince's own views are threatened. A pair of proposed towers at Victoria station could loom over his mother's garden and sprout from behind Buckingham Palace when seen from outside Clarence House, his London residence.
Leading architects rebutted the prince's claims and claimed Britain was leading the world in skyscraper design.
"He's wrong," said Ken Shuttleworth, lead designer of 30 St Mary Axe, also known as the Gherkin. "London is not a museum. It has to be renewed for the next generation, especially as it attempts to become the world's leading city. We can't leave it as it is in medieval times."
"It's emotive language," said Sunand Prasad, president of the Royal Institute of British Architects. "We need to get away from the idea that there is a plague of towers sweeping across London, because there isn't."
The prince questioned why society was willing to "vandalise" historic sites. "Corporate and residential towers are being proposed across London, and overshadowing World Heritage sites from Edinburgh to Bath," he said. "For some unaccountable reason we seem to be determined to vandalise these few remaining sites which retain the kind of human scale and timeless character that so attract people to them."
The prince's remarks generated sympathy among some architects who have grown quietly concerned that tower proposals have spread beyond the square mile to the traditionally low-rise South Bank and even to suburbs, breaking the unwritten rule that towers should be built in clusters to limit their impact.
"There is no great clarity about where we build towers and where we don't," said Prasad. "What we need is a policy that supports principles like building towers in clusters and next to major transport interchanges."
The last time the prince used the carbuncle image, projects were cancelled and planners ran scared of contemporary design. Now the impact is likely to be less seismic, predicted Prasad.
"He now seems to know more of what he is talking about and the general public has become far more design-savvy, which means people are better placed to judge what he is saying. I don't think he will get the same reflexive obedience this time."
Clash of cultures

Prince Charles
Construction began in 1993 of Poundbury, a traditional village on Duchy of Cornwall land. It was drawn up the Prince's favoured planner, Leon Krier and includes traditional pubs, greens and a village hall. The Prince's Foundation for Architecture and Urbanism is planning a new settlement of 1,000 homes on the edge of Newquay, Cornwall, dubbed Surfbury. It will use renewable energy, rainwater harvesting, and local and reclaimed materials. The prince commissioned architect Craig Hamilton to design a six-bedroom mansion in Wales. It is widely expected to be a "starter palace" for Prince William, with solar panels on the roof and sheep's wool insulation. It will use recycled bricks.

Richard Rogers
The Lloyds of London office tower in the Square Mile made Rogers' name in the UK. It had its pipes and ducts on the outside and became the best example of the British "hi-tech" movement. The Millennium Dome, built in 1999, was designed by Richard Rogers and Partners just as Rogers himself became a powerful member of the New Labour hierarchy advising John Prescott on urban policy. In 2006 he won the Stirling prize for the first time for Barajas airport in Madrid. His practice also designed Terminal 5 at Heathrow which is scheduled to open next month.

8 comentários:

daniel costa-lourenço disse...

Ainda assim falamos de realidades com diferenças abissais: em população, PIB, dinâmica, área.

O problema da construção em altura não se coloca com tanta severidade em londres como em lisboa, até porque londres já tem bastantes arranhacúes e são construídos em locais livres ou já enquadrados na paisagem. Aqui questiona-se sobretudo as mudanças no skyline.

Em Lisboa o problema não é a resistência à mudança ou á nova arquitectura como muitos reclamam. É antes o desrespeito pela herança dos nossos antepassados, da qual somos apenas fieís depositários.

Porque razão se insistem construir arran-céus em lisboa em cima de zonas urbanas consolidads ou históricas ou fazer ensaios de arquitectura destruindo a história da cidade?

E o exemplo de bilbao não é referência já que o mudeuo nao foi construido no centro histórico mas em zona industrial abandonada. (ao contrário do previsto para o parque mayer...

and so on...

Filipe Melo Sousa disse...

porque é que postam em estrangeiro?

francisco feijó delgado disse...

Como em tantas ocasiões, o Principe Carlos fala sem saber e diz asneiras.

Não percebo qual é o problema português da integração de arquitectura moderna com a malha arquitectónica tradicional. Com conta, peso e medida as coisas podem ficar muito melhores. E com conta, peso e medida não digo limitar a cinco andares ou castrações dessa ordem.

Veja-se o caso de Viena, como exemplo desta boa, inovadora e recompensadora evolução urbana.

Anónimo disse...

Ó SCHEEKO TM (deve ser estrangeirado) se conheces algum exemplo diz pois não conhecemos nenhum!
Tomara tu teres a cultura e o bom senso do PC.

francisco feijó delgado disse...

Em Viena há o exemplo da Haas-Haus numa das mais emblemáticas praças da cidade. Entre outros exemplos, há a Hundertwasser Haus, tal como as obras de Gaudi em Barcelona - estas já centenárias- que foram em qualquer dos casos rupturas brutais com amiente dos edifícios circundantes, sem com isso ter destruído a beleza e ou o "ambiente urbano" do local. Outro caso é o da Kunsthaus de Graz. Todos eles são bons exemplos para mim, assim como o edifício Swiss Re na própria cidade de Londres.

Concordo perfeitamente com o desrespeito aos antepassados, mencionado pelo daniel, mas esse mesmo desrespeito existe também nos mais abjectos e marquisados monos da avenida da república e tantos outros descritos neste blog, ou nos aglomerados modernos como S. Marcos, (no concelho de Oeiras ?).

Quanto ao estrangeirado, seja lá o que isso for, qual o problema de ser ou deixar de ser? Que tem a ver uma coisa com outra?

daniel costa-lourenço disse...

nao sou contra a inovação em bairros históricos, como aliás se faz na Europa.

Sou é contra algumas "inovações" desastrosas que, no caso português são a maioria.

Quanto à AV. Da República não se trata de qualquer inovação. É desastre e handicap civilizacional.

francisco feijó delgado disse...

Totalmente de acordo!

Anónimo disse...

Infelizmente para todos nós não temos nenhum Gaudi, porque todos as tentativas realizadas em Portugal, são desastrosas. O egocentrismo de alguns tem primazia sobre a cidade que é de todos.