Search questions

• Reference: 2001/0053-1
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

What is the appropriate use for tall buildings? Does this predicate their siting? .

• Reference: 2001/0057-1
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

What have you done in your capacity as the Mayor's Chief Architecture Advisor to nurture and develop the talent of London's new generation of architects? .

• Reference: 2001/0063-1
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

Do you agree with recommendation 6.3 of the London Planning Advisory Committee's Supplementary Advice on High Buildings and Strategic Views published in 1999 that the ten strategic views of central London should be protected? If no, what guidelines should be adopted as to what views are worth preserving, if any? .

• Reference: 2001/0064-1
• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

At the moment there is no protected strategic view of the City for East Londoners. Do you believe that this section of the capitals' population should enjoy an amenity that is available to the residents of Hampstead, Richmond and Greenwich? If so, what should the view be? If no, why not? .

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

I am a little concerned about your desire for there to be a dynamic skyline in London. One of the great things about London is the residents' sense of place, and familiarity, and neighbourhood, and one of the things which actually ties Londoners into London are indeed the strategic views, and not necessarily just strategic. In my patch the strategic view is of the city spread before me from Richmond Park, for example. And I am not certain I want to see that dynamically changed. But I really want to ask you, what is the place of familiarity, as far...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

I would like to ask you about the conflict between the development of strategic sites and strategic views. In your view, if view is the appropriate word, should strategic views be sacrificed to economic regeneration and the development of the strategic sites?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

Do I understand from what you are saying that there could be new strategic views and the existing strategic views could be improved? Presumably improved by new build of tall buildings which are often simply no more than corporate virility symbols?

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

Lord Rogers, you have made it quite clear that any scheme will work provided it is of the right design. I want to ask you about who should be the arbiters of design? For example here at the GLA the Mayor has already told his planning committee, even though it was unanimously against him for example on the Bishopsgate Tower, he took the view that his single view was more important than ours. We already know that he thinks his views are more important than those of English Heritage; the chances are he thinks his views are more important than...

• Question by: Tony Arbour
• Meeting date: 11 July 2001

Well if it should not be you as an individual who is in a position to say that, is it right that one man should be able to impose his views on the rest of us?