IT was lauded as a breathtaking piece of architecture and has been visited by nearly 1.3 million people since it opened its doors last year.
However, despite winning plaudits for its concept and design, the £100 million Riverside Museum in Glasgow has failed to make it on to the shortlist for a prestigious award.
Now leading architects – and the woman who designed the museum – have expressed their disappointment and disbelief that the building was overlooked for one of the inaugural Royal Incorporation of Architects in Scotland (RIAS) Awards.
Because the building is not in line to win an RIAS award, it will not be eligible to win an accolade from the Royal Institute of British Architects (RIBA), which cannot overturn or question the RIAS shortlist.
The museum's architect, Zaha Hadid, who is considered one of the world's most high-profile architects or "starchitects", is disappointed that the four-strong judging panel did not include her building on the 23-strong shortlist.
Her colleague, Jim Heverin, associate director at Zaha Hadid Architects, said he could only imagine that RIAS was "trying to make a point" by not including her building.
He told The Herald: "More than one-fifth of the people of Scotland have now visited the Riverside and if that is not improving people's lives or environment, then I am staggered.
"We entered the awards but we were not shortlisted.
"It is surprising and disappointing – and it is not only us that is saying this.
"Given that there's no limit on the amount of buildings that can be shortlisted – someone is trying to make a point.
"Zaha is disappointed, disappointed that we were not even shortlisted, and we are disappointed, for Glasgow and for BAM [the construction company]. People should be able to look at this building and judge it on its own terms."
Mark Slattery, of BAM Construct UK, said the construction company shared others' "bemusement" about the lack of shortlisting for the building.
It would have taken the support of only two of the four-strong judging panel of the RIAS Awards to secure a position for a building on the shortlist, and with it a subsequent visit by judges, but the Riverside did not garner that level of support, although one judge, Robert Dye, did question its absence.
In this week's Architects Journal (AJ), Rab Bennetts of Bennetts Associates, who has previously chaired the Scottish RIBA Awards judging panel, described the snub as "crackers", adding: "Whether or not you like Zaha Hadid's architecture, it is undeniably worth a visit to see whether it should receive an award.
"Awards judging should be more like architectural competitions of old, when an assessor's report was obligatory to explain the reasons for a jury's decision. Not to visit what is probably [Scotland's] most published building of the year seems so perverse it needs an explanation."
In the AJ, Mr Heverin adds: "We don't understand the judging criteria – it seems the museum was snubbed for other reasons –perhaps prejudice against Zaha, as she's a big name?"
Tony Chapman, RIBA's head of awards, said: "The RIBA representative on the Scottish jury, Robert Dye, did question the non-shortlisting of the Riverside Museum.
"However, the RIBA has no powers to insist on a visit to a building in Scotland."
Scottish-based architect Alan Dunlop said the snub could be construed as "sour grapes" while Gareth Hoskins, of Gareth Hoskins Architects, one of the runners-up in the original architectural contest, said: "It's certainly a building that is worthy of a jury visit and one I would have expected to have been included on the shortlist."
Neil Baxter, secretary of the RIAS, said: "We had 71 submissions so 48 didn't make the cut.
"The judges make their decisions based on the givens [documents supporting the entry]. On that basis they chose 23 schemes throughout Scotland."
He said he could not comment on specific projects which were not shortlisted.
The judging panel included RIAS president Sholto Humphries, Dr Anne Lorne Gillies, Scottish singer-songwriter, broadcaster, author and academic, Robert Dye of Robert Dye Associates and Peter Wilson, director of the Wood Studio at Napier University.
Why are you making commenting on The Herald only available to subscribers?
It should have been a safe space for informed debate, somewhere for readers to discuss issues around the biggest stories of the day, but all too often the below the line comments on most websites have become bogged down by off-topic discussions and abuse.
heraldscotland.com is tackling this problem by allowing only subscribers to comment.
We are doing this to improve the experience for our loyal readers and we believe it will reduce the ability of trolls and troublemakers, who occasionally find their way onto our site, to abuse our journalists and readers. We also hope it will help the comments section fulfil its promise as a part of Scotland's conversation with itself.
We are lucky at The Herald. We are read by an informed, educated readership who can add their knowledge and insights to our stories.
That is invaluable.
We are making the subscriber-only change to support our valued readers, who tell us they don't want the site cluttered up with irrelevant comments, untruths and abuse.
In the past, the journalist’s job was to collect and distribute information to the audience. Technology means that readers can shape a discussion. We look forward to hearing from you on heraldscotland.com
Comments & Moderation
Readers’ comments: You are personally liable for the content of any comments you upload to this website, so please act responsibly. We do not pre-moderate or monitor readers’ comments appearing on our websites, but we do post-moderate in response to complaints we receive or otherwise when a potential problem comes to our attention. You can make a complaint by using the ‘report this post’ link . We may then apply our discretion under the user terms to amend or delete comments.
Post moderation is undertaken full-time 9am-6pm on weekdays, and on a part-time basis outwith those hours.
Read the rules hereComments are closed on this article