• Place: the sum of parts? Think piece #3

    By John Bishop When I re-read the flyer for the debate, I realised that the Series title “A Place for Everyone?” is at the core of my research and practice as an artist and architect, that started with my designing nurseries and primary schools back in the late 60s. In my work over the 40 […]

    Continue reading
  • New podcast / Place: designed for sharing?

                On 21 October in Edinburgh we launched our 2015/16 Debate Series with the question – Place: designed for sharing? Our three speakers, Cat Macaulay, Riccardo Marini and Sandra Sutton and many members of the audience shared stories of their experiences of creating, managing and using spaces for sharing. Listen […]

    Continue reading
  • Place: the sum of parts? Think piece #2

    By Jez Hall A little story about Levenshulme’s secret lake (this piece leads on from Jez Hall’s first think piece for our Manchester debate ‘Place: the sum of parts?’) It doesn’t even have a name yet. A post industrial reservoir that fed a 19th century bleach works. Closed many years ago the site became derelict […]

    Continue reading
  • Place: the sum of parts? Think piece #1

    By Jez Hall Place for a community to live The upcoming Glass-House Manchester debate on ‘Place, a sum of parts?’ has made me reflect on my own particular arc of experience as a layabout, activist, parent, and now a community capacity builder. Manchester is my home, a place I have raised my kids, earned my […]

    Continue reading
  • Place: designed for sharing? A round-up of our recent Edinburgh debate

    Last Wednesday in Edinburgh, we held the first debate in our 2015/16 Series, A Place for Everyone?, which explores the common elements in place that bring us together and our role in shaping them, as communities and as individuals. Exploring the question ‘Place: designed for sharing?’, we prompted our audience with questions such as: is […]

    Continue reading
  • Place: designed for sharing? Think piece #1

    By Becca Thomas A place for everyone: socially engaged design and spaces “The true purpose of architecture is to help make human existence meaningful” Keith Bradley, The Happiness Inbetween, essay in Building Happiness. The creation of places for everyone, socially engaged spaces and the people to inhabit them is something that has had somewhat of […]

    Continue reading
  • To a More Ambitious Place: looking back to look forward

    As we warm up for this year's Glass-House Debate Series, let's take a final look at where we ended the last Series, in March this year: 'To a More Ambitious Place' gave us ample scope to delve into our what we want for our places, bringing forward a range of voices and views, in four [...]

    Continue reading
  • Do we accept the status quo in place? A round-up of our London debate

    “We are both too ambitious and not ambitious enough” opened our first speaker, Alastair Donald on Wednesday at our fourth and final debate in this year’s Series To a More Ambitious Place. The British Council Director for the British Pavilion at the Venice Architecture Biennale told us firmly that design in placemaking was suffering from […]

    Continue reading
  • To a More Ambitious Place: Do we accept the status quo in place? Think piece #3

    By Alexei Schwab The pressure is on for London to build more homes, and we are seeing a raft of new policies to stimulate delivery of housing in the Capital. In previous periods of large-scale building, place making often took a back seat: the homes might have been well-designed, but the areas suffered from a […]

    Continue reading
  • To a More Ambitious Place: Do we accept the status quo in place? Think piece #2

    By Sir Tom Shebbeare An amateur planner: asset or a hazard? Challenging the status quo by using the tool of neighbourhood planning could involve making amateur planners of us all. But are we an asset or a hazard? I’m 63 and until very recently had never been involved with planning – although the concept of […]

    Continue reading