I'm told that, as a new user, I can't post images. Mibbe others might? But here's my letter of objection:
Dear Sir/Madam,
I object to these proposals.
First, I should say that I am the architect of the original building. I note the success of the Poetry Library and its need to expand, and fully support the right of an organisation to plan this, and the concordant need for buildings to evolve. However that should not be an invitation to damage buildings or the built environment in general and on this basis I object to this Application, on the following grounds:
. The Privatisation of the Old Town’s Urban Realm: the Courtyard and Reading Area was reserved, under the Holyrood North Site Masterplan, as part of the public realm. The proposals, essentially, privatise this area.
. The Loss of Original Features: the destruction of the Forestair and Courtyard Reading Area.
. Severe Damage to the Original, Complete Design: the building was conceived as a contemporary re-interpretation of the mediaeval buildings of the Old Town, which met their sloping sites with vigour and imagination. The Reading Area and Forestair do exactly that, settling-in to the steep Close elegantly. The proposal’s perspective, from up the Close, seriously misrepresents this slope, flattening it out by up to 20 brick courses (well over one metre); but still demonstrates the extreme awkwardness of the proposal’s relationship with its steep site.
. The Loss of a Work of Art: Mary Bourne’s “Carpet of Leaves” sits at the door and is a place-specific work, mediating between the landscape (the distant view of the crags) and the building. The proposal assumes its removal or, at least, it being stripped of meaning.
. That the Library’s Brief can be Entirely Met Within the Existing Building: as the proposals I have drawn for them have demonstrated.
In Conclusion: this proposal severely, and unnecessarily, damages a much-loved and highly-regarded work of architecture, that is of integral significance to the World Heritage Site.
Malcolm Fraser
Dear Sir/Madam,
I object to these proposals.
First, I should say that I am the architect of the original building. I note the success of the Poetry Library and its need to expand, and fully support the right of an organisation to plan this, and the concordant need for buildings to evolve. However that should not be an invitation to damage buildings or the built environment in general and on this basis I object to this Application, on the following grounds:
. The Privatisation of the Old Town’s Urban Realm: the Courtyard and Reading Area was reserved, under the Holyrood North Site Masterplan, as part of the public realm. The proposals, essentially, privatise this area.
. The Loss of Original Features: the destruction of the Forestair and Courtyard Reading Area.
. Severe Damage to the Original, Complete Design: the building was conceived as a contemporary re-interpretation of the mediaeval buildings of the Old Town, which met their sloping sites with vigour and imagination. The Reading Area and Forestair do exactly that, settling-in to the steep Close elegantly. The proposal’s perspective, from up the Close, seriously misrepresents this slope, flattening it out by up to 20 brick courses (well over one metre); but still demonstrates the extreme awkwardness of the proposal’s relationship with its steep site.
. The Loss of a Work of Art: Mary Bourne’s “Carpet of Leaves” sits at the door and is a place-specific work, mediating between the landscape (the distant view of the crags) and the building. The proposal assumes its removal or, at least, it being stripped of meaning.
. That the Library’s Brief can be Entirely Met Within the Existing Building: as the proposals I have drawn for them have demonstrated.
In Conclusion: this proposal severely, and unnecessarily, damages a much-loved and highly-regarded work of architecture, that is of integral significance to the World Heritage Site.
Malcolm Fraser