01/07/08

Robin Hood Gardens - DCMS compounds EH's lack of vision

We are very disappointed that DCMS has decided not to list Robin Hood Gardens but we are not in the least surprised.  Although the advice to English Heritage from DCMS refers throughout to the Secretary of State (Andy Burnham) we are reliably informed that the case was handled by the junior minister, Margaret Hodge, who has made no secret of her personal hostility to modern architecture and to large post war structures in particular.

It is clearly a decision that future generations will find incomprehensible.  This will be the case regardless of whether the building is now demolished and becomes the Euston Arch of 2020, or if (as we still hope) an innovative design solution leads to its successful refurbishment and survival despite the short-sightedness of the bodies that are meant to safeguard our heritage.  EH’s advice to DCMS that the Estate was not of significant historic interest will be seen as an example of a beleaguered quango seeking to curry favour with its paymasters.

The decision largely reiterates the reasons for refusal cited by EH, which we consider ill judged and refuted in our letter to DCMS dated 21st May 2008 (see Appendix 1).   Much of the argument surrounding this case has focused on dubious evidence of residents’ views - both now and in the years since original construction.  Recently residents have expressed a preference for replacing their building, but we believe that this just reflects a very understandable long term frustration with poor maintenance, combined with a profound lack of confidence in the Local Authority’s ability to develop an inspiring refurbishment solution.  

This option is still open, and Tower Hamlets could show visionary forward thinking and deliver a scheme to please both preservationists,  residents and set an example of sustainable development.      

C20 now has 28 days to consider appealing this decision and will seek legal advice before proceeding. 

Ends

Appendix 1

Text of letter from The Twentieth Century to the DCMS dated 21st May 2008

Re: Response to English Heritage advice not to list Robin Hood Gardens

We are disappointed that English Heritage has decided not to recommend listing, despite the advice of its expert advisory body EHAC.   This advice was determined even though the two members of the committee most likely to act as advocates for listing (Gavin Stamp and Bridget Cherry) were excluded from the discussion and decision making progress on the grounds that they were Trustees of the C20 Society.

We would like to make the following observations on the reasons given by EH for their conclusion that RHG does not meet the strict criteria for listing a post war housing estate. EH give three reasons—interestingly they are not quite consistent about what these reasons are across the various documents posted on their website. 

First reason:
Their assessment that “as housing it has serious shortcomings” includes the point that the “Indefensibly narrow, twisting stairwells” have never provided adequate access to the decks---but these decks are essentially lift accessed.   They say the decks don’t work as “community-fostering ‘streets in the sky”, but when we visited there were children out playing’ and where they saw “prison-like boundary walls”, we saw a beautifully sculptural enclosure that also acts as a sound baffle.    These are highly subjective judgements.

Second Reason:
The argument that the estate was “not significantly influential” because it came at the end of the “streets in the sky” movement is clearly undermined by the number of architects signing up to Building Design campaign. There are many other aspects of the scheme that had enormous impact.  And as for the loss of the colour schemes (one of the changes cited as diminishing the significance of the building) it’s patently obvious that this is a superficial change that could be easily reinstated. 

Third Reason:
EH’s  final reason (depending on which bit of the EH website you go to) is either that the estate attracted little admiration from contemporary architectural critics, or that the building “does not compare successfully with other 20th century estates listed at grade ll, such as the Barbican and the Brunswick Centre.”   Given the strength of critical support subsequently the first point seems a quibble, and the latter is surely undermined by the fact that both Barbican and Brunswick Centre should be listed at least II*, and no doubt will eventually be regraded. 

Please can you consider these observations as an addition to our original listing submission which you already have.

Yours,
Jon Wright
Caseworker
The Twentieth Century Society

Notes for Editors

The Twentieth Century Society's letter to English Heritage recommending the listing of Robin Hood Gardens can be seen here

For more images or information please contact:
Jon Wright (jon.wright@c20society.org.uk) telephone 020 7250 3857
Out of hours: 07855 406718

Back