LETTER: Paternoster Square revisited
Your support helps us to tell the story
From reproductive rights to climate change to Big Tech, The Independent is on the ground when the story is developing. Whether it's investigating the financials of Elon Musk's pro-Trump PAC or producing our latest documentary, 'The A Word', which shines a light on the American women fighting for reproductive rights, we know how important it is to parse out the facts from the messaging.
At such a critical moment in US history, we need reporters on the ground. Your donation allows us to keep sending journalists to speak to both sides of the story.
The Independent is trusted by Americans across the entire political spectrum. And unlike many other quality news outlets, we choose not to lock Americans out of our reporting and analysis with paywalls. We believe quality journalism should be available to everyone, paid for by those who can afford it.
Your support makes all the difference.From Mr J. C. Bassett
Sir: When the proposed scheme for the redevelopment of Paternoster Square (Section Two, 8 January) first emerged, I warmed to it. I visited the exhibition in the crypt of St Paul's and thought it seemed warm and humane, in contrast to the proposals by Sir Richard Rogers and others which seem rather tired and formulaic. I was under the impression, probably incorrectly, that it would to some extent recreate the original street pattern, and maybe some of the atmosphere that existed before the Blitz.
Since then, I have become aware of the true nature of the scheme. Far from being a genuine and people-orientated development, it is in reality a hulking steel-framed office block, a patronising transatlantic sham designed to get around the mediocre tastes of Prince Charles, and a public which won't be overjoyed at yet another office scheme.
The question is what is to be done instead. It would be nice to establish the pre-Blitz atmosphere, but this is not easy. This sort of thing has to grow of its own accord, and any development must be of quality due to its siting. Maybe the answer is something along the lines of the current proposal, but without the sham and the tweeness, and with a diverse function.
Yours faithfully,
Julian Bassett
London, SW2
Join our commenting forum
Join thought-provoking conversations, follow other Independent readers and see their replies
Comments