How £414m parliament may not last beyond 2060

OFFICIALS could be forced to demolish the Scottish parliament or pay for a major renovation by around 2060.

Architecture experts have warned Holyrood chiefs that the 13-year-old building could reach the end of its ‘useful life’ in less than 45 years.

It comes as a report for the Scottish Parliamentary Corporate Body valued the structure at £304million – despite it costing £414million to build.

And the study also says Holyrood has an ‘estimated useful life’ of only 44.5 years.

According to architectural writer David Black, the building has a number of ‘problems’.

Speaking to the Sunday Mail, he said: ‘The building will have

‘Phenomenally bad investment’

to have a massive overhaul to bring it back into condition – or be demolished and replaced.

‘It doesn’t compare terribly well with the Scottish Parliament Hall in Edinburgh, which was built in 1639 and is still there. The Holyrood building has in-built problems. It is so ridiculously over-engineered.’

Mr Black added: ‘A lot of modern architecture is built for a 30-year life cycle. I went to an architecture conference where they were talking about 30-year life cycles being good for the profession because it keeps them all in work.

‘I thought that was an astonishing attitude. There is no excuse for buildings lasting so short a time. It is a sort of designed-in obsolescence with a commercial objective.’

The Scottish parliament was finished three years behind schedule and vastly over budget in 2004. It had initially been estimated the building would cost up to £40million but during the construction, this continued to rise before hitting a final total of £414million.

Officials have said the structure, designed by Spanish architect Enric Miralles, could last around 100 years.

Since its completion, Holyrood has been hit with a number of problems, including a 12ft wooden beam swinging loose in the debating chamber. During the summer, parliament chiefs spent £1.75million – or £357 a bulb – replacing the old lighting in the debating chamber.

Peter Wilson, project architect for the Museum of Scotland in Edinburgh, criticised the mismanagement of the parliament building and hit out at the ‘whitewash’ inquiry into cost and delays.

He said: ‘The Scottish parliament should have cost about £150million if it had been managed properly.

‘But it was totally mismanaged – though an inquiry, which was a whitewash, said no one was to blame.

‘But you could say the building has more value than some of the occupants. If you replaced them with wall or loft insulation, you wouldn’t know the difference.’

He added: ‘If the building only lasts 50 years, then it was a phenomenally bad investment.’

According to Scottish parliament officials the ‘design brief’ for Holyrood predicts a working life of a century.

A spokesman said: ‘Our annual accounts assume an initial 50 years depreciation period for the building, which is based on standard accountancy practice. The design brief for the Holyrood building however envisages a working life of 100 years.’