Laban

Capitalcase study:Laban Deptford, London Borough of Lewisham

Capital case study:Laban Deptford, Lewisham

7 Planning and project development8 Design and tender process9 Opening the new building10 Operation since opening11 Wider lessons12 Credits

1 Contents

2 Executive summary3 Project background and history4 The organisation5 Vital statistics6 Rationale for the project7 Planning and project development8 Design and tender process9 Opening the new building 10 Operation since opening11 Wider lessons12 Credits

1 Contents2 Executive summary3 Project background and history4 The organisation5 Vital statistics6 Rationale for the project

Executive summaryThe new Laban building is one of the most widely praised arts buildings of recent years, winning the RIBA Stirling Prize in 2003. It replaced buildings Laban had used since 1973 and which had become inadequate. Laban is one of the UK’s leading dance conservatories and in addition to formal training and education, it operates an extensive local community programme and hosts professional dance performances.

The new building, designed by Herzog and De Meuron Architects, cost £23.8 million, with funding that included Arts Council England National Lottery (£12,629,336), a private funder (£2,500,000), English Partnerships and London Development Agency, London Borough of Lewisham and other funds raised from trusts and foundations. Laban contributed £809,000 from its own funds.

Work started in May 2000 and the centre opened in October 2003. The facilities include a 300-seat theatre, a studio theatre, 13 dance studios, a community studio and meeting room, a media information resource centre (with specialist library) and a generous foyer with café and bar. In line with the approach developed in its previous building, different functions (administration, rehearsals and dressing rooms) are distributed around the building and not in separate blocks.

Project background and historyRudolf Laban was one of the founding figures of European modern dance and established the original Laban Centre immediately after World War II. The centre moved to Addlestone, Surrey in 1953 and remained there until moving to New Cross in 1973. By that time it had established itself as one of the foremost dance conservatories. It was the first to offer an Honours degree in dance (1976) and an MA in dance studies (1980).

From the buildings in New Cross (including a former school and church buildings leased from Goldsmith’s College) an outreach programme was developed to serve the local community and a small, but growing, professional programme of dance was introduced. The buildings had been developed in a rather ad hoc way, as and when demand arose, however this resulted in a unique atmosphere and way of working with all areas of the operation (teaching, students, administration, etc) working alongside each other rather than in separate areas.

By the mid-1990s it was clear that these buildings were inadequate for the activities and were increasingly difficult and costly to maintain and operate. Under the leadership of Marion North (Laban’s director from 1972 until 2003) a review of the sites was undertaken by Burrell Foley Fischer Architects. The review concluded that the site was full, not suited to more development and that thought should be given to a new building on another site. The concept of the new centre began to be developed in 1995 and was initially tied into the overall redevelopment proposals for Deptford and the availability of the government’s Single Regeneration Budgets (SRB). Although SRB money became a less important aspect of the development as things progressed, contributing to urban regeneration remained a key feature and the basis of much of the funding support. A site was identified next to Deptford Creek, owned by the London Borough of Lewisham and used at the timeas a depot.

The organisationThe mission of the new Laban is, ‘to provide a vibrant centre of excellence for life-long learning in dance and dance-related activities, serving the future of dance at a local, national and international level’. Laban offers a wide range of professional education and training courses in all aspects of dance and dance theatre.

In addition to the formal education and training programmes, Laban has long been committed to an extensive programme of community activities, which currently attract 1,000 people a week to the new building. These include regular dance classes for adults, young people and children, workshops and projects with schools, projects with children with disabilities, programmes to encourage boys and young men into dance, open days and projects and an annual summer school.

All of the above are further supported and reinforced by an extensive and regular programme of dance performances and dance company residencies including those presented in association with Dance Umbrella, LIFT and the London Festival of Mime. Currently these programmes represent some two to three performancesper week.

Arts Council England’s Lottery funding was focused on the building’s community dance activities and the support to professional dance development including the public performances in the new theatre. The key objective of the development was to rehouse all these programmes and their future development in a building that was fit for purpose with facilities of the highest standards. The building would also need to reflect the nature of the activities and inspire its users to greater heights of achievement.

At the commencement of the development process Laban was an independent college. In 2005 it came together with Trinity College of Music (based in Greenwich) to form Trinity Laban Conservatoire of Music and Dance and as a result is now funded by the Higher Education Funding Council of England (HEFCE).

• work started on the planning of the new facilities in the mid- 1990s and work commenced on site in May 2000 with the demolition of the existing buildings. The new Laban Centre opened in October 2003 with its first intake of students and an official opening celebration was held in February 2004• project costs totalled £23,887,378 • Arts Council England Lottery Capital funding totalled £12,029,366 plus an additional £600,000

Other key funders included:

• a private funder who originally offered £4,500,000, but on his death this was reduced to £2,500,000• English Partnerships and London Development Agency (LDA) £1,235,000, plus a further £730,000 from the LDA• Lewisham Borough £505,000 and the transfer of the land at a 50 per cent reduction on the market value• Greenwich Borough and Creekside Renewal Programme from the Single Regeneration Budget £50,000

• Bridge House Estate Trust Fund £100,000• Garfield Weston Foundation £250,000• other donations totalling £518,000• Laban’s own funds £809,000

Design and project management teams

Architects and lead consultantsHerzog and de Meuron (UK) Ltd

Project ArchitectHarry Gugger

Project managersArup Project Management Rob Leslie-Castor

Quantity surveyorsDavis, Langdon and EverestRoger Lewis

Structural and services engineersWhitby Bird and Partners

Theatre consultantsCarr and Angier

Business planningArup Economics and Planning

AcousticsArup Acoustics

Signage consultantsHolmes Wood Consultancy

Access consultantsAll Clear Design Ltd

Landscape architectsVogt

Main contractorBallast (Wiltshire) PLL

Arts Council England monitorJackson Coles Construction Consultants Janice Bowman

Artist’s commission Michael Craig-Martin (colour scheme for external cladding and mural to wall of theatre block)

Key Laban people for the development

Chief executive during the development (since retired)Marion North

Deputy chief executive (during development) – since CEOAnthony Bowne

Client development adviserJohn Munday

Head of financeJohn Jennings

Vital statistics

The eventual schedule of accom-modation included in the building was:

• the Bonnie Bird Theatre with 300 seats• the studio theatre with 100 seats• 13 climate-controlled dance studios

(originally to be 18 but reduced toreduce costs) with appropriate support facilities – dressing rooms, lockers, toilets, and so on

• an outdoor theatre space within the landscaping• a community studio and meeting room• media Information resource centre

(MIRC) alongside the archive and specialist library

• 100-seat lecture theatrecafé and bar within a generous foyer and entrance area

The key object of the project was to meet the needs of young people and of life-long learning for the wider community; as such, the development was able to address the Arts Council’s criteria for young people, professional development of artists and provision for dance – an art form that was still underrepresented in capital developments and that was generally still in a developmental stage.

Rationale for the project

Planning and project development (part 1) Detailed planning for the project started once it was established that the Goldsmith’s site was not capable of further development. The brief was created by the Laban team based on their detailed working knowledge of their existing buildings, on experience gained from a visit to the Hong Kong Academy of Arts and with assistance from Rickie Burdett from CABE (the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment). The brief was specific about the scale of accommodation required but otherwise provided a broad concept with no limitations on how it might be developed. The ad hoc development of the old buildings had resulted in very particular ways of working, which were seen as positive and were included in the brief.

An international architectural competition was held and an impressive list of practices submitted proposals with the shortlist including some of the top names in contemporary architecture. This impressive response was in the view of the appointed

architects at least in part due to the quality of the competition jury and the very effective way the competition and selection were handled. It seems that only Herzog and de Meuron visited the existing centre and therefore were the only practice to fully understand the particular working of that set-up and how that should be transferred to a new building. Arts Council funding was made available in these early stages to support the development work.

Lewisham Council was, through its Mayor, very supportive from the earliest stages, making the site available at 50 per cent of the market value. This also made obtaining planning permission straightforward. A Section 106 agreement (whereby in return for planning permission a developer undertakes to provide specified facilities or services) was drawn up between the Laban and the Council that guaranteed a level of local community access and programmes – a level that has been consistently exceeded since opening.

Although the site had for many years been used for industrial uses there were no major contamination issues and excavated material has been redistributed within the site as part of the landscaping scheme, thus saving some £300,000 in removal costs.

A good working relationship was established with Arts Council England and with CABE, which provided professional help to the internal team as they developed the architectural brief.

Much of the early business planning was conducted in-house, but specialist advice was sought about VAT. This resulted in partial registration in March 2000 and allowed for 50 per cent of the VAT on the development project to be reclaimed.

Planning and project development (part 2)

Although fundraising for the partnership support was quite slow in the early stages, Laban remained determined to push forward with planning and other work, despite some advice to the contrary. Because of the then status of the school and of dance and drama within the higher education system there were no educational sources of capital support. A realistic overall level of funding had been determined at these planning stages and, as a result, as various cost plans were developed for the building, rethinking became necessary. The main casualty of these exercises was the number of studios, which were cut from 18 to 13, as well as looking at plans to retain parts of the old buildings for education purposes. Items such as solar energy screens and a green (planting) roof were also lost.

The school was able to continue its full programme in its old building during the whole of the development and building period and then transfer the main operation to the new building on its completion.

Design and tender process (part 1)

The architects were appointed after the competition and worked very closely with the project team at Laban and their other consultants on developing the detailed design. A creative and very productive, albeit sometimes combative, relationship was established between a very imaginative design team and a very strong client with clear and fully worked-up ideas as to how the building needed to work. The design process allowed time for testing and rethinking as it developed and was a continuing process throughout with an open dialogue between the client and the design team. The architects felt this was especially important with a client whose experience of the building processes was limited. This process also allowed for some significant changes, even at a fairly late stage, such as the move from a steel structure to a concrete one. This relationship also resulted in a building that was genuinely ‘owned’ by the client throughout and on completion.

The resulting building creates a powerful and highly visible focus for the regeneration of Deptford, which also respects the historic setting (including the nearby early 18th century St Paul’s Church by Thomas Archer). The main curved facade is constructed of translucent coloured polycarbonate sheets punctured by a series of large clear glass windows, which was developed in collaboration with the artist Michael Craig-Martin. During the day this gives partially obscured views into the centre’s activities as well as creating a light and airy feel to the interior. At night the building radiates light out on to the surrounding landscaping and makes the building highly visible.

Within, the building is structured around a series of corridors and courtyards centred on the main theatre space with its external wall covered with Michael Craig-Martin’s mural. Colour is used throughout to add to the feel but also aids orientation within and around the building. The layout retains the mix of functions found to work so well in

the old building – so, for example, there is no separate office unit, but offices are placed around the centre alongside studios and other activities. Having set this standard it is unfortunate that other elements of the regeneration of the local area are not of this quality and indeed there is the danger that other developments will eventually distract from the Laban buildings.

As is the common practice in Switzerland and other countries the architects decided to use a traditional contract (JCB 80) but to divide the work into specialist areas each with a specialist input. These three phases were demolition and site clearance; piling; and the facade and finishes. This approach also allowed the momentum to be maintained, with detailed design work continuing as the first areas of work were underway on site. It also delivered a completed building in time for the start of a new academic year. This approach however caused some concern with Arts Council monitors, but the client and architects remain convinced that it was the best way

Design and tender process (part 2)

to proceed and that the resulting extra costs were largely the result of inflation and not of the process. Indeed the architects are convinced that this approach is largely responsible for the quality of the building work.

Demolition work started on site in May 2000 and the main contract was let in March 2001, but with a large proportion of provisional sums. Detailed design work continued as other work commenced on site, though it appears that at some points the contractor experienced difficulties in getting the detailed information at the time it was required. The main problem during construction was a major claim (£1.5million) from the concrete sub-contractor who had under-estimated the complexity of the structural design. The dispute was eventually settled in favour of Laban but only after a lot of effort and legal costs.

The whole building process is described as being a very tense one, but the result was a very happy one for Laban. Unfortunately, the main contractor went out of business at the end of this contact leaving Laban to engage others to undertake the ‘snagging’ on the handed over building, which wasnot easy.

To achieve the quality and nature of building as originally conceived, it is felt that the budget was not adequate and significant compromises were required to bring the project in on budget.

Opening the new buildingLaban’s full operation continued in the old buildings up to the end of term in early summer 2002, with June to October of that year being used for the transfer to the new building, due to be completed in time for the start of the new term. The building was not fully completed, however, until September so a more hurried transfer was needed – and achieved successfully – with the first students starting in October. An initial opening programme of community and professional events was planned for the remainder of the year to test the new facilities. An ‘official opening’ took place in February 2003.

Marketing and publicity for the new building was undertaken by outside specialist arts marketing and media personnel and a highly successful campaign was achieved with a huge amount of worldwide coverage. This interest was largely focused on the architecture, but the dance and educational aspects also receivedgood coverage.

The new building required approximately 50 extra staff, mainly in areas such as technical support, building management and security, bringing the total to about 150 people. The operational costs of the new building and its programmes are now approximately £7 million per year (it is difficult to separate them from the whole Trinity Laban operation), an increase of some £2 million on the previous operation. The revenue is derived from student fees, hire of facilities, fees from classes and the theatre income. The catering is franchised and also contributes to the overall operation.

Operation since openingThe quality of the new building in its overall concept and feel, together with the particular high-quality facilities, have all contributed to a great increase in interest in the Laban’s programmes. This has included a 10 per cent increase in the number of government-funded student places and a major growth in the number of students from around the world applying for places. The public performance programme is now able to attract (and afford) a much greater range of companies and artists of an even greater quality than before. This includes special relationships with a number of companies, including Random Dance and the Henri Oguike Dance Company, which have access to the centre’s resources to prepare and premiere new work. This is greatly supported by the access to studio space and having a theatre space with a fly-tower.

Performances, including those by students, are now programmed on average for three nights each week and the audiences for the work have grown considerably. This programme is now a key part of the dance programme of London and the South East alongside the large-scale venues of central London and the small-scale venues occasionally used throughout the area. Most importantly it is one of the key venues that consistently programmes contemporary dance of the highest order. This programme is directly promoted by Laban, sometimes in association with other bodies and receives no Arts Council subsidy, other than indirectly through some of the dance companies.

The feeling is that the building has worked very well in every respect, with the exception of some of the heating and ventilation systems, which were poorly and possibly hurriedly commissioned and have led to some maintenance issues.

Since the creation of the Trinity/Laban, the building receives some 52 per cent of its income from the HEFCE (Higher Education Funding Council for England), but it is projected this will be reduced to approximately 33 per cent of costs by 2020 and that represents amajor challenge.

Plans are now being prepared for an extension to the building that will principally look to provide the studios that were cut from the original scheme.

Wider lessonsSome of the key lessons include:

• the strongest message comingfrom this development is that a strong client, with clear and practical ideas about their needs, working with an equally strong and creative architect and design team can produce a building of outstanding architectural quality and that is very effective in its day-to-day operation

• in addition to the Arts Councilfunding the project raised almost all of the other support on the basis of its contribution to regeneration and not the usual arts funding sources, indicating that arts projects can be successful in this area

• it is Laban’s view that although thefunders were generally supportive there were many points in the process when only the absolute determination of the Laban team kept the project going and this included deliberately not taking some of the advice offered to them. The unusual approach (in the UK) to the building contract (in

three phases to allow design work and construction to happen at the same time) was one such example

• Laban’s view is that the keydecisions that made the whole process a success was the appointment of a creative and responsive architect and getting the right project manager

• the response to the architecturalcompetition shows that a relatively little known arts project can through a good brief, high-profile jury and international marketing attract the interest of the world’s very best architectural practices and that leading practices will work closely and well with arts clients with whom they feel they have a common creative approach

• an iconic building, which attractsa lot of media and general attention, can have an impact on the quality of the uses of it and the works created in it and begin to refine how the area of work is considered. Such a building can

also have a marked and positive impact on its locality

• if such buildings are to explorenew technologies and be more environmentally friendly, that a high level of investment is needed with public funders taking the lead

• buildings of this quality shouldideally be part of a much wider agreed master plan for an area so that its position and feel are not compromised by later developments on adjacent sites

www.laban.org

CreditsArts Council England14 Great Peter StreetLondon SW1P 3NQ

www.artscouncil.org.uk Email: enquiries@artscouncil.org.uk Phone: 0845 300 6200 Textphone: 020 7973 6564 Charity registration no 1036733

You can get this publication in Braille,in large print, on audio CD and inelectronic formats. Please contact us if you need any of these formats.

To download this publication, or for the full list of Arts CouncilEngland publications, visit www.artscouncil.org.uk

Research: Brian Harris

Designed by Crush www.crushed.co.uk

Photos:

Title page - top and main: Martin Jordan Executive summary - main: Martin Jordan bottom: Mark Whitfield Project background and history - top: Merlin Hendy main: Mark Whitfield The organisation - top and main: Merlin Hendy Vital statistics - top: Mark Whitfield main: Merlin Hendy Rationale for the project - main: Mark Whitfieldbottom: Marin Jordan

Planning and project development 1 and 2 - main: Martin Jordan bottom: Merlin Hendy Design and tender process 1 and 2 - main: Merlin Hendy bottom: Martin Jordan Opening the new building - top: Martin Jordan bottom: Merlin Hendy Operation since opening - top: Martin Jordan bottom: Merlin Hendy Wider lessons - main: Martin Jordan bottom: Merlin Hendy

Laban

Documents

Trinity Laban Postgraduate and One Year Dance Programmes

LABAN NOTATION SCORES: AN INTERNATIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY VOLUME …ickluoif.cluster006.ovh.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/10/... · 2013-10-13 · LABAN NOTATION SCORES: AN INTERNATIONAL

Laban 'E

Laban Principles for UX Design

Economics by Laban Muriithi Wachira

REFLEXÕES soBRE LABAN, o MESTRE DO MOVIMENTO

LABAN NOTATION SCORES: AN INTERNATIONAL BIBLIOGRAPHY ...html.ickl.org/docs_resources/biblio3.pdf · laban notation scores: an international bibliography – volume iii – electronic

Laban! A Love Story (preview)

Management of Qillatul Laban (Inadequacy of Lactation

Seeing, Sensing and Recognizing Laban Movement Qualities

KINETOGRAPHY LABAN / LABANOTATIONickl.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/06/Information_ENDCC.pdfKINETOGRAPHY LABAN / LABANOTATION INTERNATIONAL COUNCIL OF KINETOGRAPHY LABAN / LABANOTATION

LABAN- MIDDLE EASTERN FERMENTED DAIRY PRODUCT A REVIEW

Isolation and Characterization of Bacteriophages from Laban … · 2017-05-04 · Isolation and Characterization of Bacteriophages from Laban Jameed 57 many other bacterial species,

trinity laban conservatoire of music & dance prospectus17

Rudolf Laban and Topology: a Videographic Analysiseprints.whiterose.ac.uk/102197/1/labantopology.pdfRudolf Laban and topological movement: a videographic analysis Abstract This paper

Brooks-Harmony in Space-Rudolf Laban

Trinity Laban Prospectus 2015-16

Aagw2010 June 08 Laban Macopiyo Agcommons

MANGHULA LABAN SA MGA BANSA - prophesyagainst.com

A Dynamic Bayesian Approach to Computational Laban Shape