Examination of Witnesses (Questions 40-44)
1 NOVEMBER 2004
MR ADAM
WILKINSON, MR
TERENCE BENDIXSON
AND MR
TONY TUGNUTT
Q40 Chris Mole: That is a broader context.
What I am suggesting is that you cannot separate the design from
the development with a Chinese wall, because as well as the wider
context you have got the context of the development as a whole
in which the design sits, surely?
Mr Bendixson: In my view, I think
you can. Whether or not a scheme is a mixed development or a hotel
or an office are aspects that the local authority is going to
be dealing with. CABE might well think that a building that was
a hotel was extremely well designed and suited to its context.
It might then be turned down by the local authority because they
wanted an office there. There is the distinction between design
and development.
Q41 Chairman: One of the things which
have been put to us is that it is alright to wrap CABE as though
it was an organisation which always came up with a consistent
view of life, but it depends very much on who you happen to get
on the design review panel as to what answer you get. Therefore,
there is a problem of consistency, in terms of different views
and the different styles of architecture and who is actually on
the panel. Is that a problem which you have come across?
Mr Bendixson: Certainly we have
noticed that, over the history of particular schemes, where, quite
rightly, CABE has been invited to come back on several occasions
over a period of two years, the same people were not on the review
panel for successive meetings. Clearly that is a problem.
Q42 Sir Paul Beresford: Is it a problem
or is it the other way round? CABE is an advisory panel and what
you are getting is different thoughts from different experts,
which makes the scenario fun, or exciting, and gives us an opportunity
to develop and broaden instead of building the same old thing?
Mr Wilkinson: How can that be
helpful for the developer, getting different advice in stages
and inconsistent advice?
Q43 Sir Paul Beresford: It is advice
to the developer, advice to the local authority and, at the end
of the day, it is a decision made by the local authority on what
the developer wishes to put forward, surely?
Mr Bendixson: No. It is no different
really from the role of the architect of a particular scheme.
If the development at the beginning of the scheme had one architect
and halfway through another architect and at the end a third architect,
it would be bound to be a dog's breakfast. There is bound to be
a tendency, if CABE's panel changes over the course of its advice,
for there not to be continuity in that advice.
Q44 Sir Paul Beresford: It will be exciting
and new?
Mr Bendixson: I do not see how
you can think it is going to be exciting. I think it is just going
to be a muddle.
Chairman: At that point, we have to bring
this session to an end. Thank you very much indeed for your evidence.
| 
