This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.theguardian.com/artanddesign/2016/nov/27/bling-goes-the-capital-the-illuminated-river-thames-project-supersewer-boomerang
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 2 | Version 3 |
|---|---|
| Bling! goes London: the Illuminated River project and other stories Bling! goes London: the Illuminated River project and other stories | |
| (about 2 hours later) | |
| Early next month the mayor of London will announce the winner of the competition to find the designers of the Illuminated River, a £20m project to create a permanent “world-class lighting scheme” over 17 bridges in central London. The Kinks’ “dirty old river”, TS Eliot’s “sweet Thames”, the waterway rhapsodised by Wordsworth and given a Venetian sparkle by Canaletto, old Father Thames himself will, depending on the choice of winner, be arrayed with patterns like a Hawaiian shirt, or disco hues of orange and purple, or lights that switch on and off in response to its tidal pulse, as if he were wearing the world’s biggest Fitbit. | Early next month the mayor of London will announce the winner of the competition to find the designers of the Illuminated River, a £20m project to create a permanent “world-class lighting scheme” over 17 bridges in central London. The Kinks’ “dirty old river”, TS Eliot’s “sweet Thames”, the waterway rhapsodised by Wordsworth and given a Venetian sparkle by Canaletto, old Father Thames himself will, depending on the choice of winner, be arrayed with patterns like a Hawaiian shirt, or disco hues of orange and purple, or lights that switch on and off in response to its tidal pulse, as if he were wearing the world’s biggest Fitbit. |
| To the casual observer, the Thames looks quite all right already – to be precise, absolutely stonkingly wonderful | To the casual observer, the Thames looks quite all right already – to be precise, absolutely stonkingly wonderful |
| Described as a “public realm commission on an unprecedented scale”, the Illuminated River aims to fix a problem you might not have known existed, which is that the Thames is “a ribbon of darkness… at odds with the ambition to make London a 24-hour city”. It is promised that the cost will be almost entirely borne by private benefactors, with £5m pledged from the Rothschild Foundation and £5m from the Arcadia Fund, which was set up by the philanthropist Lisbet Rausing. | Described as a “public realm commission on an unprecedented scale”, the Illuminated River aims to fix a problem you might not have known existed, which is that the Thames is “a ribbon of darkness… at odds with the ambition to make London a 24-hour city”. It is promised that the cost will be almost entirely borne by private benefactors, with £5m pledged from the Rothschild Foundation and £5m from the Arcadia Fund, which was set up by the philanthropist Lisbet Rausing. |
| A quite dazzling array of creative and eminent people are involved – artists such as James Turrell and Michael Craig-Martin, the former Serpentine gallery director Julia Peyton-Jones, architects David Adjaye and Diller Scofidio + Renfro, who were co-creators of the High Line in New York. The project has come about because the banker and philanthropist Lord Rothschild, through conversations with Turrell going back years, felt that the current lighting of the river is a bit of a mess. Turrell says that “the river that once united London came to divide the city” and that the lighting project offers the “possibility of uniting the city again”. He speaks of the magic of life at night, “when we finish our day job, get dressed up and have a different life”. Illumination, he says, can make a city that is “a peasant by day” into a “princess by night”. . | A quite dazzling array of creative and eminent people are involved – artists such as James Turrell and Michael Craig-Martin, the former Serpentine gallery director Julia Peyton-Jones, architects David Adjaye and Diller Scofidio + Renfro, who were co-creators of the High Line in New York. The project has come about because the banker and philanthropist Lord Rothschild, through conversations with Turrell going back years, felt that the current lighting of the river is a bit of a mess. Turrell says that “the river that once united London came to divide the city” and that the lighting project offers the “possibility of uniting the city again”. He speaks of the magic of life at night, “when we finish our day job, get dressed up and have a different life”. Illumination, he says, can make a city that is “a peasant by day” into a “princess by night”. . |
| And so the Illuminated River will join the garden bridge, a “diamond jubilee bridge”, an alternative garden bridge, a proposed floating parliament, and yet another garden bridge that reuses a former railway crossing, in the ever-growing number of entrepreneurial proposals dreamed up by private individuals, with varying prospects of success and of support by public authorities. Which in turn follow a long line of islands and lagoons, of floating lidos, “living bridges” and pontoon walkways, the London Eye, the formerly wobbly bridge and other fantasies mostly failed but sometimes achieved. No other urban space in the country has the same power of attraction to visionaries, dreamers and self-publicists. Yet to the casual observer, especially one watching from the banks of the Mersey, Clyde, Tyne or Humber, the Thames looks quite all right already – to be precise, absolutely stonkingly wonderful – and not greatly in need of improvement. | And so the Illuminated River will join the garden bridge, a “diamond jubilee bridge”, an alternative garden bridge, a proposed floating parliament, and yet another garden bridge that reuses a former railway crossing, in the ever-growing number of entrepreneurial proposals dreamed up by private individuals, with varying prospects of success and of support by public authorities. Which in turn follow a long line of islands and lagoons, of floating lidos, “living bridges” and pontoon walkways, the London Eye, the formerly wobbly bridge and other fantasies mostly failed but sometimes achieved. No other urban space in the country has the same power of attraction to visionaries, dreamers and self-publicists. Yet to the casual observer, especially one watching from the banks of the Mersey, Clyde, Tyne or Humber, the Thames looks quite all right already – to be precise, absolutely stonkingly wonderful – and not greatly in need of improvement. |
| At the same time, huge construction projects are radically and sometimes brutally altering the river with considerably less poetic ambition, input from grandees and celebratory PR. Construction has started on the Thames Tideway Tunnel, also known as the supersewer, a £4.2bn, 16-mile-long concrete pipe under the river’s bed, whose seven years of construction will disrupt the lives of those living near its work sites and whose infrastructure of access, maintenance, ventilation and servicing will require 24 highly prominent structures to be built in and alongside the river. On the river’s banks, meanwhile, clusters of towers are going up, such as One Blackfriars, aka the Boomerang, of a scale and number the Thames has never seen before. | At the same time, huge construction projects are radically and sometimes brutally altering the river with considerably less poetic ambition, input from grandees and celebratory PR. Construction has started on the Thames Tideway Tunnel, also known as the supersewer, a £4.2bn, 16-mile-long concrete pipe under the river’s bed, whose seven years of construction will disrupt the lives of those living near its work sites and whose infrastructure of access, maintenance, ventilation and servicing will require 24 highly prominent structures to be built in and alongside the river. On the river’s banks, meanwhile, clusters of towers are going up, such as One Blackfriars, aka the Boomerang, of a scale and number the Thames has never seen before. |
| Objectors to both the sewer and the towers argue that they show insufficient sense of a big picture, that they narrowly pursue their aims of evacuating waste and making profit without a coherent overview of what might be best for what everyone agrees is a great urban asset. So there are flurries of good intentions on the one hand and blunt construction facts on the other, with little connection between them. There are many visions but no vision. | Objectors to both the sewer and the towers argue that they show insufficient sense of a big picture, that they narrowly pursue their aims of evacuating waste and making profit without a coherent overview of what might be best for what everyone agrees is a great urban asset. So there are flurries of good intentions on the one hand and blunt construction facts on the other, with little connection between them. There are many visions but no vision. |
| Somewhere in between are effective but less glamorous initiatives such as the decades-long programme of opening up of riverside paths. There are practical proposals, such as the crossings that mayor Sadiq Khan wants to build in east London, which would significantly improve the functioning of the capital, but which get less attention and support from the media than more fanciful ideas. There is the proposed bridge for pedestrians and cyclists at Nine Elms, near Battersea power station, overblown in its design and feared by residents on the more prosperous north bank, but nonetheless beneficial in its intent. | Somewhere in between are effective but less glamorous initiatives such as the decades-long programme of opening up of riverside paths. There are practical proposals, such as the crossings that mayor Sadiq Khan wants to build in east London, which would significantly improve the functioning of the capital, but which get less attention and support from the media than more fanciful ideas. There is the proposed bridge for pedestrians and cyclists at Nine Elms, near Battersea power station, overblown in its design and feared by residents on the more prosperous north bank, but nonetheless beneficial in its intent. |
| Critical to visions for the future of the Thames is an idea of what it is. Until Joseph Bazalgette embanked it in the mid-19th century it was a huge sewer, while also sustaining intricate webs of commercial activity at its edges. Until quite recently it was dominated by industry. For at least 30 years, since Richard Rogers presented ambitious proposals for new bridges and pedestrianised embankments, it has been called “London’s most undervalued asset”, the “heart” of the city, what the architect Graham Morrison now calls “London’s largest public space”. Architects like Rogers have proposed ways in which its banks can be more readily enjoyed by the public, such that is might be more like the Seine or the Grand Canal in Paris. | Critical to visions for the future of the Thames is an idea of what it is. Until Joseph Bazalgette embanked it in the mid-19th century it was a huge sewer, while also sustaining intricate webs of commercial activity at its edges. Until quite recently it was dominated by industry. For at least 30 years, since Richard Rogers presented ambitious proposals for new bridges and pedestrianised embankments, it has been called “London’s most undervalued asset”, the “heart” of the city, what the architect Graham Morrison now calls “London’s largest public space”. Architects like Rogers have proposed ways in which its banks can be more readily enjoyed by the public, such that is might be more like the Seine or the Grand Canal in Paris. |
| There is a further view, which is that its value is in its wildness. “It is crucial,” says the leading London blogger the Gentle Author, “because it is our connection to the greater natural world beyond the urban environment. It is uplifting that it is alive with something so much greater than human force.” Michael Ball, of the campaign group Thames Central Open Spaces, calls it “an incredible breathing space all across London”. Professor Tony Travers of the London School of Economics, a man often seen on TV news giving sober analyses of electoral politics, waxes lyrical on the subject: “It is properly wild, mythic, its movements are governed by the moon. When you look down it is like looking at the sea.” It is dangerous, with tides that fluctuate by 6-7m. The country’s two busiest lifeboat stations are in central London. “All interventions have to be seen against this background,” says Travers. “It’s about intruding on the wild.” In these respects the Thames is nothing like “nice rivers like the Spree or the Seine”, which are narrow, tame, not tidal – “canals, really”. | There is a further view, which is that its value is in its wildness. “It is crucial,” says the leading London blogger the Gentle Author, “because it is our connection to the greater natural world beyond the urban environment. It is uplifting that it is alive with something so much greater than human force.” Michael Ball, of the campaign group Thames Central Open Spaces, calls it “an incredible breathing space all across London”. Professor Tony Travers of the London School of Economics, a man often seen on TV news giving sober analyses of electoral politics, waxes lyrical on the subject: “It is properly wild, mythic, its movements are governed by the moon. When you look down it is like looking at the sea.” It is dangerous, with tides that fluctuate by 6-7m. The country’s two busiest lifeboat stations are in central London. “All interventions have to be seen against this background,” says Travers. “It’s about intruding on the wild.” In these respects the Thames is nothing like “nice rivers like the Spree or the Seine”, which are narrow, tame, not tidal – “canals, really”. |
| At its worst the Illuminated River could be a vanity project by a metropolitan elite… high-end light pollution | At its worst the Illuminated River could be a vanity project by a metropolitan elite… high-end light pollution |
| Travers also says that the river is a “bit like the family dog”, familiar, loved but a bit neglected. It suffers from administrative neglect at odds with the protestations of admiration from its would-be boosters. No single body takes responsibility for it. As Travers likes to point out, it forms a boundary of the many London boroughs along its edge, which means it suffers from the fact that all local authorities “are more attentive for good political reasons to their centres”, which is where more of their voters will notice what is happening. “If you want to build one library you put it in the middle,” he says, “if one waste transfer plant you put it on the edge.” | Travers also says that the river is a “bit like the family dog”, familiar, loved but a bit neglected. It suffers from administrative neglect at odds with the protestations of admiration from its would-be boosters. No single body takes responsibility for it. As Travers likes to point out, it forms a boundary of the many London boroughs along its edge, which means it suffers from the fact that all local authorities “are more attentive for good political reasons to their centres”, which is where more of their voters will notice what is happening. “If you want to build one library you put it in the middle,” he says, “if one waste transfer plant you put it on the edge.” |
| For Morrison, the Thames’s problem is that “nobody has custodianship of it, so no one’s looking at it as a space”. Both the mayor and the boroughs have so far proved unwilling or unable to take on this responsibility. He believes development on its edges should be guided by a “proper spatial conservation plan, a complete architectural strategy”, without which “developments line up along the river like pigs feeding at a trough”, each one grabbing its portion of value-enhancing view. He has argued that the river and its embankments be designated as a single listed building, so that it would be treated with the respect it deserves. Travers suggests that a single entity be created with responsibility for the wellbeing of the Thames, as has happened with a smaller London river, the Lea. | For Morrison, the Thames’s problem is that “nobody has custodianship of it, so no one’s looking at it as a space”. Both the mayor and the boroughs have so far proved unwilling or unable to take on this responsibility. He believes development on its edges should be guided by a “proper spatial conservation plan, a complete architectural strategy”, without which “developments line up along the river like pigs feeding at a trough”, each one grabbing its portion of value-enhancing view. He has argued that the river and its embankments be designated as a single listed building, so that it would be treated with the respect it deserves. Travers suggests that a single entity be created with responsibility for the wellbeing of the Thames, as has happened with a smaller London river, the Lea. |
| By contrast with governmental impotence over the river, the privatised monopoly Thames Water has been able to push through its colossal supersewer project and fund it through a compulsory increase in the water rates paid by Londoners. The purpose of the sewer seems reasonable enough, which is to augment the 19th-century systems for disposing of rainwater and sewage, which are no longer able to cope with a city that is both growing and more profligate in its use of water. The sewer’s opponents, however, argue that it is an “outdated and expensive folly” and “an extravagant way to deal with the occasional flushes of storm water” that they will be built to address. | By contrast with governmental impotence over the river, the privatised monopoly Thames Water has been able to push through its colossal supersewer project and fund it through a compulsory increase in the water rates paid by Londoners. The purpose of the sewer seems reasonable enough, which is to augment the 19th-century systems for disposing of rainwater and sewage, which are no longer able to cope with a city that is both growing and more profligate in its use of water. The sewer’s opponents, however, argue that it is an “outdated and expensive folly” and “an extravagant way to deal with the occasional flushes of storm water” that they will be built to address. |
| Professor Chris Binnie, an engineer who chaired the steering group that approved the project in 2005 has since announced that his approval was based on information that “turns out not to have been factually correct” and that the money being spent is largely a “waste”. Other objectors say that there are cheaper, less disruptive, more environmentally friendly ways of dealing with rainwater, which involve slowing down the rate at which it reaches the drains through such things as porous pavements, swales, holding ponds and rainwater tanks. But such measures require a city-wide approach, which is more the province of mayors than private companies. Thames Water finds it easier to commission heavy engineering, collect payment from its users and make a profit for its investors. | Professor Chris Binnie, an engineer who chaired the steering group that approved the project in 2005 has since announced that his approval was based on information that “turns out not to have been factually correct” and that the money being spent is largely a “waste”. Other objectors say that there are cheaper, less disruptive, more environmentally friendly ways of dealing with rainwater, which involve slowing down the rate at which it reaches the drains through such things as porous pavements, swales, holding ponds and rainwater tanks. But such measures require a city-wide approach, which is more the province of mayors than private companies. Thames Water finds it easier to commission heavy engineering, collect payment from its users and make a profit for its investors. |
| The sewer will also generate those 24 structures on the Thames foreshore, which will be as impactful as they are under-publicised. As Thames Water rightly says, these could be an opportunity to “reconnect Londoners to the Thames”, which in turn suggests that a level of attention should be paid to their design at least equal to that spent on the illuminations. Indeed, some respected architectural practices are on the job – Muf, Hawkins\Brown, Weston Williamson – and they may reveal admirable designs next year, but they are employed as sub-contractors to the three huge engineering firms constructing different sections of the sewer, a situation that often squeezes the life out of architects’ good intentions. | The sewer will also generate those 24 structures on the Thames foreshore, which will be as impactful as they are under-publicised. As Thames Water rightly says, these could be an opportunity to “reconnect Londoners to the Thames”, which in turn suggests that a level of attention should be paid to their design at least equal to that spent on the illuminations. Indeed, some respected architectural practices are on the job – Muf, Hawkins\Brown, Weston Williamson – and they may reveal admirable designs next year, but they are employed as sub-contractors to the three huge engineering firms constructing different sections of the sewer, a situation that often squeezes the life out of architects’ good intentions. |
| Meanwhile other players, of varying degrees of opportunism and seriousness, keep jumping into the anarchic void left by the lack of oversight of the Thames’s wellbeing. The garden bridge project, dreamed up by Joanna Lumley and now staggering under accusations of poor procurement procedure, poor value for money, false claims and ill-conceived design, is another. Graham Morrison’s practice, Allies and Morrison, have suggested a cheaper, saner alternative, by reusing the abandoned pillars of an ex-railway bridge at Blackfriars. The architects Gensler, who once proposed a floating corporate fun-fest next to the City of London, now want to put parliament into a big bubble-like pontoon while the Palace of Westminster is refurbished. Chris Medland, leader of the architectural practice one-world design is punting two ideas, a “Diamond Jubilee Bridge” for pedestrians and cyclists and the conversion of a disused railway bridge into a tree-planted “haven for wildlife”. | Meanwhile other players, of varying degrees of opportunism and seriousness, keep jumping into the anarchic void left by the lack of oversight of the Thames’s wellbeing. The garden bridge project, dreamed up by Joanna Lumley and now staggering under accusations of poor procurement procedure, poor value for money, false claims and ill-conceived design, is another. Graham Morrison’s practice, Allies and Morrison, have suggested a cheaper, saner alternative, by reusing the abandoned pillars of an ex-railway bridge at Blackfriars. The architects Gensler, who once proposed a floating corporate fun-fest next to the City of London, now want to put parliament into a big bubble-like pontoon while the Palace of Westminster is refurbished. Chris Medland, leader of the architectural practice one-world design is punting two ideas, a “Diamond Jubilee Bridge” for pedestrians and cyclists and the conversion of a disused railway bridge into a tree-planted “haven for wildlife”. |
| And then there is the Illuminated River project, which tries hard to avoid the garden bridge’s missteps by going about the procurement of its designers in an impeccable way. Its promises to cost the public sector very little are more plausible than the bridge’s. It has already lined up an impressive array of support, from Khan to Duncan Wilson, the head of Historic England, to the leadership of the City of London. | And then there is the Illuminated River project, which tries hard to avoid the garden bridge’s missteps by going about the procurement of its designers in an impeccable way. Its promises to cost the public sector very little are more plausible than the bridge’s. It has already lined up an impressive array of support, from Khan to Duncan Wilson, the head of Historic England, to the leadership of the City of London. |
| The official blurbs, however, ring alarms. They say the project will “contribute to the international profile for London as a world city, a centre for creative industries”, as if the role of this magnificent work of nature and humanity is to be a PR bauble. The assumption that the Thames’s relative darkness is a problem, rather than a blessed relief from the sparkling buzzing hubbub of the rest of the “24-hour” city, is untested and undebated, as is the belief that a single artistic conception is the best way to counter the lack of structured thought about the river. The blurbs also say that the river requires, as they put it, a “creative” response, which suggests that it and its bridges are blank canvases for artistic expression, whereas most of them are beautiful and fascinating structures in no need of further adornment. | The official blurbs, however, ring alarms. They say the project will “contribute to the international profile for London as a world city, a centre for creative industries”, as if the role of this magnificent work of nature and humanity is to be a PR bauble. The assumption that the Thames’s relative darkness is a problem, rather than a blessed relief from the sparkling buzzing hubbub of the rest of the “24-hour” city, is untested and undebated, as is the belief that a single artistic conception is the best way to counter the lack of structured thought about the river. The blurbs also say that the river requires, as they put it, a “creative” response, which suggests that it and its bridges are blank canvases for artistic expression, whereas most of them are beautiful and fascinating structures in no need of further adornment. |
| If you ask silly questions you get silly answers, and all six shortlisted teams combine good ideas with intrusive proposals and superfluous gestures. They have a tendency to duplicate and over-announce beauties that are good at announcing themselves – the rhythm of the tides, the arrival of sunset. One wants to make Westminster Bridge into a giant clock, on the basis that Big Ben, already quite an effective timepiece, is nearby. The best of the proposals, such as those by Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Amanda Levete, appreciate that the main aim should be to bring the best out of what is already there. | If you ask silly questions you get silly answers, and all six shortlisted teams combine good ideas with intrusive proposals and superfluous gestures. They have a tendency to duplicate and over-announce beauties that are good at announcing themselves – the rhythm of the tides, the arrival of sunset. One wants to make Westminster Bridge into a giant clock, on the basis that Big Ben, already quite an effective timepiece, is nearby. The best of the proposals, such as those by Diller Scofidio + Renfro and Amanda Levete, appreciate that the main aim should be to bring the best out of what is already there. |
| The project’s recently appointed director, Sarah Gaventa, however, makes it sound very much better than its bumf and its brief. The idea, she says, is not to create “Christmas lights 24/7” or abolish darkness. In some cases intrusive lighting that is already there will be taken away. She promises subtlety and responsiveness and that the competition will select, rather than a rigid concept, a team that will listen to the views of the many people affected. They “want to do something for London but not impose it” – “the last thing we’re going to do is destroy someone’s love of a bridge”. She talks about the experience of being on bridges rather than looking at them and about making them more enjoyable. | The project’s recently appointed director, Sarah Gaventa, however, makes it sound very much better than its bumf and its brief. The idea, she says, is not to create “Christmas lights 24/7” or abolish darkness. In some cases intrusive lighting that is already there will be taken away. She promises subtlety and responsiveness and that the competition will select, rather than a rigid concept, a team that will listen to the views of the many people affected. They “want to do something for London but not impose it” – “the last thing we’re going to do is destroy someone’s love of a bridge”. She talks about the experience of being on bridges rather than looking at them and about making them more enjoyable. |
| Turrell also says that the intention is not to obliterate the dark. He argues that the Illuminated River could reverse the “Las Vegas-isation” that the banks of the Thames are currently suffering, whereby commercial blocks of offices and flats strive for attention with ever more lurid lighting. “If you just add all the time, add more and more light, it loses its meaning,” he says. This aim would require political leverage over adjoining landowners and is beyond the project’s current brief, but it is vitally important. It doesn’t make sense to conceive delicate schemes for the bridges if they are out-glared by neighbouring buildings. At its worst the Illuminated River could be a vanity project by a metropolitan elite that, like the Bourbon monarchy, would have learned nothing from this year’s expressions of popular discontent. It would reinforce the perception that central London is a glittering self-inflating bubble disconnected from the rest of the country and its own hinterland. It would be high-end light pollution. It would gild the lilies that are the Thames bridges and polish the turd that is politicians’ failure to take care of the river. | Turrell also says that the intention is not to obliterate the dark. He argues that the Illuminated River could reverse the “Las Vegas-isation” that the banks of the Thames are currently suffering, whereby commercial blocks of offices and flats strive for attention with ever more lurid lighting. “If you just add all the time, add more and more light, it loses its meaning,” he says. This aim would require political leverage over adjoining landowners and is beyond the project’s current brief, but it is vitally important. It doesn’t make sense to conceive delicate schemes for the bridges if they are out-glared by neighbouring buildings. At its worst the Illuminated River could be a vanity project by a metropolitan elite that, like the Bourbon monarchy, would have learned nothing from this year’s expressions of popular discontent. It would reinforce the perception that central London is a glittering self-inflating bubble disconnected from the rest of the country and its own hinterland. It would be high-end light pollution. It would gild the lilies that are the Thames bridges and polish the turd that is politicians’ failure to take care of the river. |
| At its best the project could indeed enhance the experience of the Thames, to bring out the best of one of the great urban spaces of the world. It could also be the prompt for what is really desperately needed, which is a public body with the power and talents to protect its best interests and to ensure that new development adds to it rather than damages it. As Graham Morrison says, in another generation the river’s greatest qualities could be gone. | At its best the project could indeed enhance the experience of the Thames, to bring out the best of one of the great urban spaces of the world. It could also be the prompt for what is really desperately needed, which is a public body with the power and talents to protect its best interests and to ensure that new development adds to it rather than damages it. As Graham Morrison says, in another generation the river’s greatest qualities could be gone. |
| The six shortlisted Illuminated River projects are on display in the Royal Festival Hall, London SE1 until Tuesday. The winner will be announced on 8 December | The six shortlisted Illuminated River projects are on display in the Royal Festival Hall, London SE1 until Tuesday. The winner will be announced on 8 December |