All Letters to the editor articles – Page 33
-
OpinionWhat a pickle we’re in now
Your report and leader (November 5) on the state of emerging planning legislation make for disturbing reading
-
Opinion
Public interest
While we keep banging on about the protection of title, it does not appear to be of much interest to the greater community
-
-
Opinion
Good riddance
The government’s curtailment of the Thames Gateway is not only necessary, but good
-
Opinion
Creative gap
Your enlightened leader (October 22) is dead right about British planners’ lack of creative design
-
Opinion
Bad science
It is interesting that David Kohn praises Camden’s public housing of the sixties and seventies for being experimental (Culture November 5)
-
Opinion
Timely warning
Three letters last week (Gibbs-Kennet, Matthews and Smith) separately stated good reasons for registration to be reckoned unsatisfactory from the point of view of students on the way to qualifying.
-
Opinion
Legal recourse
Mike Matthews (Letters October 29) is right when he says that the Arb offers no effective protection of title. The trivial fines it imposes are no disincentive to the wide abuse of variations on the title architect
-
OpinionStop forcing me
Mike Matthews (Letters October 29) makes some lucid points with respect to the legal protection of title and I agree that a completely new approach to this is overdue. But what should that entail?
-
OpinionDriving force
Jonathan Glancey is right (October 29): Cabe’s contribution to procuring buildings of real merit has, at best, been opaque, and surely hardly justifies the huge resource invested in that quango at public expense
-
Opinion
Back to basics
Interesting letters last week: one all about protection of title, and how non-architects shouldn’t (can’t?) do what architects do, and muttering about the seven years of training; then one listing lots of the things that apparently now we don’t do – on top, of course, of all the things the ...
-
Opinion
Protection racket
I note that the RIBA is not lobbying for abolition of protection of title. It should be, as protection of title is virtually useless
-
Opinion
No opportunity
Ruth Reed claims (News October 22) that rationalising the regulation and registration of the profession (by giving it to the RIBA?) would “provide maximum clarity and economy for consumers and the profession”
-
OpinionThe wider impact
Your leader of October 1 (“Fixing the regeneration game”) and news story of October 8 (“£5.5 billion plan for Liverpool Docks in for planning”) are connected
-
Opinion
Ticking the boxes
Bill Dunster wonders why everyone isn’t rallying behind the “world-beating” level 6 Code for Sustainable Homes (Debate October 15). Perhaps not everyone is quite so convinced
-
OpinionLet’s keep Cabe and let Arb go
What a triumph! As you report (News October 22), the architectural profession is to lose a useful organisation, Cabe, and keep a useless one, Arb. But I have a suggestion
-
OpinionSave your energy
As a Code of Sustainable Homes (CSH) assessor and a certified European Passivhaus designer, I think both the arguments for and against Passivhaus as a UK standard (Debate October 15) hold value, although the argument against takes the view that the CSH is a better measure as it gives a ...
-
Opinion
Don't talk it down
I was interested, and somewhat depressed, to read Jonathan Glancey’s thoughts on the legacy of the Olympic Park (October 15)
-
Opinion
Ireland in crisis
Who told Angela Brady that 16% of Irish architects are out of work? (News analysis October 15)