ON May 23, 2014, Charles Rennie Mackintosh's Glasgow School of Art caught fire: on June 15, 2018, almost exactly four years later, unbelievably another fire broke out. The original library was lost in the first assault with its replacement and much of the building gone in the second.

Due to the heroic efforts of the fire services, no loss of life occurred, and the public watched as politicians joined with conservationists to call for salvation by replication “brick by brick”: no other option could be countenanced. Glasgow Council stated: "There is a consensus emerging that the intention of the building control people, Historic Environment Scotland, and the Art School is to save the building".

The truth, however, is much more complex. There was, and is no consensus, and no alternatives were discussed in good faith. Certainly, after the initial fire, the building was digitally archived, and it is this information that supporters of replication use to underpin their view: the current price  is £100 million. There has been no authentic investigation into how the building could be replicated without compromising the original design and the question of whether it should be has never been addressed.

What is not understood, nor accepted, is that replicating any building designed and built over 100 years ago would require major design changes to meet current building regulations, including the provision of access for people who are differently abled, and importantly, to ensure adequate fire compartmentation and safety.

Mackintosh’s genius delivered a building for a different age and most importantly, a different purpose: to allow aspiring artists to acquire the traditional skills of drawing, painting, and sculpture. Its extraordinary windows that capture the quality of north light are no longer necessary for a school which has shifted its emphasis to environmental art, digital art, 3D design, graphics, and electronic games design.

My considered view, a decade on, is that we should best honour Mackintosh’s legacy with a new design within what is left of the building rather than create a sad pastiche of the original. This would require an architectural team with sensitivity and a creative vision for the future and I am not confident that our current flawed procurement rules coupled with the lack of impetus from the GSA will deliver such a solution.

So, what can be done? Presently, the project is mired in litigation with “insurance difficulties” causing much uncertainty about funding. The structural integrity of the remaining building is reported to be “safe”, but it lies bare boned in the wake of the two-year failed procurement process to appoint an architect and design team. I contend that the Mackintosh is too important to be left in the hands of the Art School Board and that a rapid public inquiry is the only way forward. The Mack is plainly a burden for the GSA and I consider it imperative that they acknowledge that and provide for a single-purpose trust to be established to take over its care and future development.

Alan Dunlop is an architect, artist and educator. He is an alumnus of the Glasgow School of Art.

Agenda is a column for outside contributors. Contact: agenda@theherald.co.uk