Yesterday the architectural journal Building Design (BDonline) reported that the Aedas architects scheme put forward on behalf of site owners Hutchison Whampoa had been withdrawn.Earlier this afternoon the following 'Reader Comment' was posted on the story:
"A statement from Aedas: This article is factually incorrect. Hutchinson, who are the applicant for the scheme, have not withdrawn the application. However, following the receipt of responses as part of the statutory consultation process, they are pausing to reflect before deciding on a way forward."
There is only one 'n' in Hutchison and if I were reading this on the upper floor of a Hong Kong tower block I would be writing a somewhat corruscating email to Aedas. If a firm of architects cannot be bothered to get their client's name right then what hope is there that they will get the design right. Whether it has been formally withdrawn, or not, is a red herring as it is simply not going anywhere.
Back to the story; BD's Elizabeth Hopkirk focuses on the efforts by Willi Richards and others to obtain formal protection for the entire former Royal Dockyard site (in addition to the already protected structures) quoting Willi, LB Lewisham head of planning John Miller, English Heritage's Malcolm Woods and Jon Wright from the Council for British Archaeology. BD has been reporting on the Convoys Wharf planning saga for many years and if you are not already a registered user of the site it is time that you were.
As for the Aedas design, it is the usual sort of nowheresville north-west Europe stuff, but was best described by Fenster Grau in another BD Reader Comment on 15 September 2011:
"This is how the German Democratic Republic would have looked if their economy had worked."