BUILDINGin context

New development in historic areas

BUILDINGin context

New development in historic areas

Contents

Foreword 3

Introduction 4

The Need for Advice 4

The Case Studies

1 Abbots Cottages, Corfe Castle, Dorset 6Careful exercise in local vernacular

2 Century Court, Cheltenham, Gloucestershire 8Contemporary high density housing for a volume housebuilder

3 Gwynne Road Housing, Battersea, London 10 Setting a new context in a fragmented neighbourhood

4 Headland Café, Bridlington,Yorkshire 12Seafront regeneration encourages tourists back

5 Juniper House, King’s Lynn, Norfolk 14Local architectural patronage delivers sustainable and neighbourly office building

6 Left Bank Village Restaurants, Hereford 16Modern design a less intrusive option than imitation warehouse

7 Liberté House, St Helier, Jersey 18Initial reservations about modern design give way to enthusiasm

8 Library and Administration Building, Central School of Speech and Drama, Swiss Cottage, London 20Bridging the gap between domestic and institutional uses

9 Parish Room,Aldbury, Hertfordshire 22Sensitive extension to a Grade I listed church

10 Picture House, Exeter, Devon 24Enhancing a varied historic context through confident modern design

11 Retail Scheme, Davygate,York 26Patient negotiation achieves approval for modern scheme

12 Supermarket, Ludlow, Shropshire 28Accommodating a bulky use in an historic market town

13 The Bars, Chester 30Reinterpretation of local vernacular for a volume housebuilder on a complex inner city site

14 Thorp Architectural Model-Makers’ Studio, Sunningdale, Berkshire 32Imaginative insertion enhances a village setting

15 Victoria Hall, Hanley, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire 34Picking up cues without resorting to imitation

Conclusions 36

Appraising a Proposal 37

Further Reading 37

3

Foreword

English Heritage and CABE are asked to advise on many developmentproposals in historic areas. We have commissioned this report to show thediversity of interesting recent projects, and to promote the lessons that can bedrawn from them.

Thoughtless haste on the one hand and ill-considered imitation on the otherhave both over the years damaged the fabric of our historic towns and cities.But there is another way, in the form of buildings that are recognisably of ourage while understanding and respecting history and context. The buildingsshown here belong in that category. While firmly of today, they draw intelligentinspiration from what surrounds them and in that sense are rooted in the past.That is true confidence and assurance.

We have in Britain today an abundance of architectural skill and every reasonto believe in our ability to add inspirationally to the built fabric we have inherited. As this book shows, that skill is not exclusively vested inhousehold names. There is a wide variety of practices capable of respondingimaginatively to the challenges posed by building anew in historic contexts.

To release those skills, we need vision and commitment on the part of clientsand planners. Some of the schemes shown here came about only because theplanning authority had the courage and conviction to reject inferior schemesand demand something better. Sometimes this brought delay and difficulty; butproducing solutions that are lastingly satisfying does mean investing in time,effort and imagination. One of the heartening lessons of this book is that suchan investment is, in the end, almost always thought to be worthwhile, even bythose who started off as critics.

The examples here are not all perfect. But they do represent the kind ofintelligent and imaginative approach that can enrich historic environments. Wecan pay respect to those places best by continuing the tradition of pace-settingand innovation that they themselves represent. As always, this is a question notof style but of quality. And quality, whatever its stylistic guise, can bring a wholerange of benefits – not only aesthetic but economic, social and environmental.The regenerative capacity of good new design is apparent in many of theexamples chosen here.

Sir Neil CossonsChairman, English Heritage

Sir Stuart LiptonChairman, CABE

Sir Stuart Lipton Sir Neil Cossons

The Need for AdviceWhat lies behind the decision to undertakethis publication is a belief that conservationareas and other sensitive sites are not beingwell served by the development which istaking place within them and that there is awidespread misunderstanding about how todetermine what is appropriate for such sites.In order to understand how this situation hasarisen it is necessary to consider the history ofdevelopment in towns and cities. In someplaces this happened over a brief period as aresult of some profound economic or socialchange, but more often, until the 19thcentury, the typical story is of gradualdevelopment with occasional spurts of activity.This organic model of development produceda harmonious result, in which buildings ofdifferent periods co-existed happily becausebuilding methods, materials and scalesremained consistent over the centuries andchange was gradual. As the 20th centuryprogressed, the increasing volume of motortraffic placed the infrastructure under evergreater strain. Together with the arrival of late20th-century ambitions and the materials andmethods that accompany them, this presenteda considerable challenge to the organic model.The whole process of development hasaltered out of all recognition and issurrounded by a panoply of rules and controls

governing every aspect, from the siting ofbuildings and the design of roads and otherinfrastructure, through the design of details, tothe use of materials.

Faced with this change, responses to thechallenge of developing in historic areas havebeen variable. On the one hand there havebeen those who have wanted to mark acomplete break with the past in terms of scale,materials and methods. On the other therehave been those who have wanted topreserve at all costs. These two basic positionshave existed for many years, the balancebetween them shifting from time to time inresponse to changing fashion and opinion andthe gradual accumulation of experience.

In response to the perception that too muchurban fabric of value was being lost, planningpolicy has developed in a way which hasidentified areas of architectural and historicinterest and established special protection forthem. In the present context it is enough tosay that the law provides that development insuch areas must preserve or enhance theircharacter. The courts have decided that thismeans that they must not be made worse asa result of the development. The areas whichhave been protected by designation asconservation areas vary widely in character

and importance. They include not only theclassic high streets of country towns whichhave grown organically over the centuries, butalso areas with a strongly defined unitarycharacter as a result of having beendeveloped all in one go, often to the designof a single architect.

In all these areas, whatever their history, thedesign question raised by new developmentproposals relates to the architectural characterwhich is now appropriate to the placeconcerned. The different attitudes to modernmethods and materials mentioned above haveled to two simplified positions and both thesepositions have led to unsatisfactory outcomesin many cases. On the one hand are thosewho believe that new development shouldsimply ‘reflect its own time’ and that if it doesthis it is absolved from the need to defer orpay heed to its setting in any way. Theargument often used in support of this positionis that what shocks today no longer does so intwenty years’ time and that past radicalinnovations now seem part of an organicwhole. On the other hand there are thosewho believe that what is important is topreserve the character of the conservationarea at all costs, and that this is best done byopposing all development and insisting thatwhen it does take place it copies thearchitecture of existing buildings. They arguethat it is the maintenance of historic characterthat is the reason for the designation ofconservation areas and that their sole purposeshould be that of preservation.

The former argument often leads to proposalsor developments which show no regard forthe context in which they sit and erode, ratherthan enrich, the character of the area as aresult. The latter (a very different matter fromauthentic reconstruction) leads to a superficialechoing of historic features in new building,which itself erodes the character just as much.

4

Particularly unfortunate results often occurwhen the two opinions are forced tocompromise, often as a result of an attempt tochange the architecture of a proposal into amore contextual form. Signs that this has takenplace include

● stepping down, when a tall building meets itslower neighbour at more or less the sameheight and then gets higher in steps as itmoves away along the facade. Unless thechange in height arises out of therequirements of the brief, this can produce alop-sided appearance in the new buildingand merely emphasises the difference inheight between the two. Unless it is donewith great finesse it does the older buildingno favours at all;

● random application of historic elements.Triangular pediments unrelated to the restof the front of the building are a commonexample of this, as are string courses orcornices out of scale with the building.Sometimes described as ‘the lipstick on the gorilla’, such embellishments are quite often seen in conjunction withstepping down;

● matching materials which don’t match. Ifcheap, modern, machine-made bricks arenot used structurally but in panels, completewith mastic expansion joints, they do notmatch hand-made historic brick-work. Theysimply emphasise the difference in materialsand methods. The same is true with stoneand render;

● scaling up. Detailing large modern buildingswith models taken from small historic onesor attempting to sub-divide large volumesvisually while retaining big floor-plates oftendoes no more than emphasise just howlarge the new building is instead of making itlook smaller, as is hoped.

A word often used to describe projectsincluding elements of this kind is pastiche,which, when used correctly, implies theassembly of stylistic elements from differentsources. Frequently, however, the term hascome to be a generalised way of abusingarchitecture with any historic elementsregardless of the skill or accuracy with whichthey are employed, and it is rarely of any usein reaching a decision on the merits of aparticular proposal.

The Right ApproachThe belief underlying this publication is thatthe right approach is to be found inexamining the context for any proposeddevelopment in great detail and relating thenew building to its surroundings through aninformed character appraisal. This does notimply that any one architectural approach is,by its nature, more likely to succeed than anyother. On the contrary, it means that as soonas the application of a simple formula isattempted a project is likely to fail, whetherthat formula consists of ‘fitting in’ or‘contrasting the new with the old’. Asuccessful project will

● relate well to the geography and history ofthe place and the lie of the land

● sit happily in the pattern of existingdevelopment and routes through andaround it

● respect important views

● respect the scale of neighbouring buildings

● use materials and building methods whichare as high in quality as those used inexisting buildings

● create new views and juxtapositions whichadd to the variety and texture of the setting.

The right approach involves a whole process inaddition to the work of design, from decidingwhat is needed, through appointing thearchitect, to early discussions with and eventualapproval by the planning authority. It mayinvolve the preparation of a formal planning ordevelopment brief for the site in question andwill certainly involve discussing the mattersusually dealt with in such documents andcoming to an agreement. Collaboration, mutualrespect and a shared commitment to the visionembodied in the project will be needed if theoutcome is to be successful. The best buildingsarise from a creative dialogue between theplanning authority, the client, the architect andthe other key professionals involved.

The Case StudiesThe case studies have been chosen toilluminate a number of different themes andaspects of development:

● a wide range of different uses;

● a wide range of locations;

● different architectural approaches;

● different processes by which success wasachieved.

In every case the result achieved is far beyondthe average quality for developments of thekind, though it is not suggested that they arebeyond criticism.

An attempt has been made to avoid glamoroussettings or uses. The hope is that all those whohave responsibility for some aspect ofdevelopment in conservation areas and othersensitive sites will find something here withwhich they can identify and which will help themto achieve excellence in their work, whether it isan aspect of the design, the development or theplanning process. The lessons of each project arebrought together at the end of the publication.

5

IntroductionThis publication has been commissioned by the Commission for Architectureand the Built Environment (CABE) and English Heritage. Its purpose is tostimulate a high standard of design when development takes place inhistorically sensitive contexts. It aims to do this by example, showing a series ofcase studies in which achievement is far above the ordinary and trying to drawsome lessons both about design and about the development and planningprocess. As a result, it is hoped that people will be encouraged to emulate thecommitment and dedication shown by the clients, architects, planning officersand committee members involved in the projects illustrated and be able tolearn from their experience.

6

case

stu

dy

1 Abbots Cottages, Corfe Castle, DorsetCareful exercise in local vernacular

The ProjectThe project, designed by Ken MorganArchitects, is for nine cottages to providesocial housing on land at Corfe Castle, Dorset.The client was a local charity which wanted toprovide affordable housing for local peoplewho otherwise found it difficult to remain inthe village. This well-preserved and attractivehistoric village is popular with week-enders andholiday-makers on account of its picturesquecharm and proximity to the coast and this haspushed up property prices beyond the reachof local pockets.

The SiteThe site lies on East Street, which is at thispoint leading towards the south out of thecentre of the historic village of Corfe Castle. Itcomes at a point where there was previously agap in the development along this side of thestreet, between the rows of cottages to thenorth and south. Behind the site lies theHalves, an area of common grazing notionallydivided into strips for the use of members ofthe village community. The Halves extends aband of green undeveloped land into thecentre of the village. At this point the builtfabric is becoming slightly less uniform andtight-knit than it is at the centre of the villagebut the architecture is still homogeneous, withstone walls, small windows and stone slates orthatch on the roofs.

The ProblemsThe first problem was to achieve permission todevelop this site at all, since it was seen in thelocal plan as an ‘important gap’ in thedevelopment towards the edge of the village,marking the beginning of the transition to thesurrounding countryside. In design terms theproblem was to find an architectural languagewhich would relate well to its surroundings inthis exceptionally pretty and well-preservedhistoric village. It was also necessary to meet therequirements of the building regulations and thehighway engineers, both of which presenteddifficulties in developing a site which has anarrow access from the street with low cottageson either side. It was also a challenge to planthe site in such a way as to accommodate thenumber of dwellings required and provideprivacy and sunlight to each home. There werealso awkward constraints arising from rights ofaccess to the rear of the adjoining properties.

The SolutionsThe architect’s first decision was to attempt todesign a scheme which would not benoticeable in the context of the village. Thismeant adopting the materials and methodsand, as far as possible, the dimensions of thehistoric cottages and houses in the village. Theintention was not to produce buildings whichwould appear to be older than they reallywere, but buildings which would beunsurprising in their context. There are a fewdetails which are clearly not traditional as wellas many which are taken directly from thevernacular tradition in the neighbourhood.

Except for a narrow entrance into thedevelopment, the street frontage is built upwith two cottages, kept as low as possible byreducing the ceiling heights so as to minimisethe change in height from the thatched cottageimmediately to the south. A stone wall joinsthe new cottages to the existing one tomaintain the building line on the street.

In order to improve visibility for vehicles usingthe narrow entrance, the cottages are pulledback slightly from the building line and thecorner adjacent to the entrance is furtherpulled in a few inches at low level. Like all theothers, these cottages are of two storeys, builtin random stone with artificial stone tiles onthe roofs and painted timber joinery. Theappearance of the masonry is softened by theuse of an element of grit in the mortar, andthe joints having been brushed out with a stiffchurn brush. This careful approach is broughtto all the small details of the scheme; botharchitect and builder are experienced in thematerials and methods of the locality.

One further cottage faces the access road intothe development. Three more, one at rightangles to the others, create a small courtyard atthe heart of the scheme, and the access thenturns right and left with a range of threecottages running east to west towards the rearof the site and the Halves. This tight planningachieves a high density of development, but thealignments are such that each cottage benefitsfrom a private garden facing south or west.

The development was planned in two phases.Because the whole principle of developing thesite was controversial in terms of the local plan,the negotiations with the planning authoritywere difficult and protracted. It seems likelythat permission would not have beenforthcoming if the social purpose had not beenso widely supported. Following completion,however, the development has been widelypraised and has won awards from the RuralDevelopment Commission and Civic Trust.

The LessonsThis scheme demonstrates that a well thought-out proposal with a socially desirable purposecan justify departing from policies embodied ina local plan. It also shows that traditionalmaterials can be used and detailed in such away as to enable new buildings to fitunobtrusively into an historic setting providedthat they are in the hands of people withadequate local skill and experience. It drawsattention to the possibility of solving problemsof access by ingenuity and compromise ratherthan the simple application of standardsolutions. Similarly it shows that modern livingaccommodation can be provided in buildingswhich depart slightly from current standards insuch matters as ceiling heights.

EAST STREET

FIELD

CORFE CASTLE

WES

TST

REET

The junction betweennew and old is subtleand carefully handled.

In design, materials andquality, the new cottages(forming the middleterrace in picture belowand the right hand rangein the picture above)relate very closely totheir older neighbours.

N

▲

▲

▲7

3 The ProjectThis scheme, designed by Feilden CleggBradley, consists of eighty-seven apartmentsand nine town houses, a communal gardenand under-ground car parking. The clientswere Beaufort Homes and the apartments andhouses are for sale on long lease. Thearchitects were appointed after anotherscheme was felt to be of insufficiently higharchitectural quality for this prominent site.

The SiteThe site, which was formerly occupied by a1960s office block, lies on the main Bath Roadat the entrance to Cheltenham town centre.Its architectural surroundings are varied.Adjoining it on the Bath Road is a typicalCheltenham terrace. Directly opposite areVictorian Gothic college buildings, and behindthe site on Montpellier Grove are semi-detached, 19th-century villas. Looming overthe scene a little further away is the bulkyEagle Star building, which has been widelycriticised for disrupting the scale of this part ofthe town.

The ProblemsThe central problem presented by this projectwas that of finding an architectural languagesuitable for the highly diverse surroundings ofthis site, in an historic town where themistakes and excesses of the 1970s have ledto a wide-spread distrust of anything appearingto be modern architecture. In site-planningterms, the problem was to provide therequisite density of accommodation withinbuildings that remain in scale with theirsurroundings.

In settings where the surrounding buildings areall of the same date, the local planningauthority has demanded a careful reproductionof historic architecture using high qualitymaterials. In this case, however, it took theview that a scheme which was historicist incharacter would be inappropriate, apart fromanything else because the surroundings wereso various that it was not possible to identify astyle which might be suitable to copy. Ittherefore asked for a proposal which wascontemporary in character but also contextualand of high quality.

The SolutionsThe decision to locate all car parkingunderground improved the environment ofthe development and enabled adequatedensity to be achieved at the same time.Buildings occupy the edges of the site. Alongthe Bath Road, set back behind a landscapedarea, is a five-storey range of apartments withthe penthouse level set back below the roof.At the back of the site are four-storey villasand three-storey town houses in scale withtheir neighbours. The gaps between theseranges are occupied by two four-storeydrums, each containing apartments, and at thecentre of the site are small private gardens forthe town houses and a communal landscaped

garden courtyard as well as access to theunderground garage. As well as providingvisual interest these drums help to allow lightinto the courtyard and the apartments facingonto them. The setting back of the penthousestorey keeps down the apparent height of themain range and improves its proportions andthe breaks in the roofline of the penthousewindows adds rhythm to an elevation which is100 m long but has no entrances because itfaces a main road.

The buildings are clad in render, with plainwindow openings relieved by grooves incisedinto the surface. The balconies to each of theapartments are lined in hardwood, which isused more extensively on the courtyardelevations of each of the buildings.

The scheme was supported by English Heritageand by the Royal Fine Art Commission, whichbelieved that it represented a skilful andrefreshing reinterpretation of the Cheltenhamarchitectural tradition. The render is a modernequivalent of stucco and the rhythm of thewindow openings and the use of incised linesharmonise with Regency detailing withoutimitating it. It was also supported by the localcivic society and by the council’s consultativearchitects’ panel. The market supported thescheme to the extent that seventy per cent ofthe units were sold well before the schemewas completed.

The LessonsThis scheme demonstrates that it is possible toachieve a high density of residentialdevelopment in an historic context withoutdistorting the scale of the existing pattern ofdevelopment. It also shows that it is possibleto find an architectural expression whichrelates closely to historic models while beingunequivocally modern in idiom. It illustratesthat a local authority can achieve architectureof quality if it makes it clear that this is what itrequires. It shows that a volume house buildercan make a commercial success of a highdensity, well-designed scheme in places otherthan the centres of large cities. Finally, thescheme demonstrates that brave architectureis likely to remain controversial in somequarters; some local opinion has criticised thescheme as ‘unsympathetic’ although a civicsociety spokesman said ‘There is a lot ofsubtlety to it. As a town we need to preservethe best of the old and complement it withthe best of the new’.

Century Court, Cheltenham, GloucestershireContemporary high density housing for a volume housebuilder

CHEL

TEN

HAM

COLL

EGE

BLANDFORD ROAD

BATH

RO

ADM

ON

TPER

LIR

GRO

VE

The stuccoed elevationsand regular fenestrationof the Bath Road rangeoffer echoes of aRegency terrace. Thestucco matches thattraditionally used onCheltenham terraces butit is applied to a clearlycontemporary building.

8

case

stu

dy

2

The balconies successfullyuse unequivocally modernforms and materials,despite the historic setting.

▲

The new building takesits place comfortablyalongside a typicalCheltenham terrace.

▲

Within the scheme, tworotundas, containing flats,provide visual interest.

▲

N

9

11

The site at GwynneRoad lies between 19th century domesticterraces, a railway line,historic Battersea andhigh-rise housing. Inthese disparatesurroundings, the newbuilding manages to berobust enough to createits own context.

▲

10

case

stu

dy

3 Gwynne Road Housing, Battersea, LondonSetting a new context in a fragmented neighbourhood

The ProjectThe scheme, designed by Walter MentethArchitects for the Ujima Housing Association,provides eight properties to rent, of which fourare one-bedroom flats for people moving outof or back into the community from supportedmental health care facilities. Two are groundfloor flats designed for occupation by peoplewith physical disabilities and the remaining twoflats are for general occupation. The project isone of a number on which this architect hasworked alongside the same client, a housingassociation with a tradition of seeking toachieve a high standard of design. Sue Belk ofthe Ujima Housing Association says ‘Ujima hasalways taken pride in the quality of its newhousing and there is real commitment toachieving excellence on the part of thecommittee’.

The SiteThe cramped brownfield site was formerlyoccupied by a civil defence building. It lies atthe junction of five roads and is adjoined by alarge multi-storey housing estate, an industrialestate and a railway embankment, as well as byan Edwardian residential district of somearchitectural quality. Beyond the railwayembankment Battersea High Street containsinteresting historic buildings and has beenundergoing a process of improvement andregeneration in recent years. The housingestate has disrupted the historic street patternas well as the scale of development around thesite, but elsewhere the street pattern remains,although the character of the neighbourhoodhas been seriously eroded. Despite the lowquality of some of its neighbours, the site liesat a crucial point at the entrance to BatterseaHigh Street and is prominent in views alongSimpson Street, which has the best qualityarchitecture in the immediate vicinity. It is alsothe site of a street market which providesvaluable activity at street level.

The ProblemsThe urban design problem involved designing abuilding which would relate effectively to itsdisparate and fragmented surroundings. It alsoneeded to mark the entrance to BatterseaHigh Street and bring forward the high qualityof the buildings which are found to the northbeyond the railway bridge. The architecturalproblem was to provide a building of a suitablestandard which also met the requirements setout in the brief and high environmentalperformance standards and to do all this withinthe tight budget available. The need to provideseparate access to the flats for those withmental health problems and to the other flats,and to deal with the noise from the railwayline, presented particular additional problems.

The SolutionsThe development is conceived of as a single,free-standing, flat-roofed pavilion, simplyplanned with the living rooms at the cornersand the services grouped at the centre of theplan. Entrances at either end of the buildingseparate access for the different categories ofoccupant, as required by the brief. It isconstructed entirely of single sized metricalconcrete blocks, laid both vertically andhorizontally, and rendered on the outside. Thisgives excellent sound and heat insulation aswell as durability, and produces a building withits own highly individual character.

The gardens, some of which are shared andsome of which belong to individual flats, aresurrounded by high dry-stone walls heldsecurely in metal cages. These walls provideprivacy for the occupants and a highlydistinctive expression for the development.Money was saved because this method ofconstruction does not need foundations;economies were such that it was possible toprovide each apartment with storage space inan outdoor shed. The flat roofs of the shedsare covered with soil and planted.

Careful setting out on the site means that thebuilding sits happily in the centre of the viewalong Simpson Street.

The LessonsThis project shows that a restricted budget andan unpromising site need not preventarchitectural excellence from being achieved. Itshows that architecture of high quality canextend urban regeneration beyond its obviousboundaries and point the way forward for aneighbourhood where the historic pattern ofdevelopment has been destroyed by thechanges wrought in the late 20th century. Itdemonstrates that a quirky, distinctive, modernbuilding can sit happily in the context of anhistoric street. It provides high density, lowscale development which is not content simplyto ape historic styles.

GWYNNE ROAD

BAT

TER

SEAH

IGH

STR

EET

SIMPSON STREET

ORVILLE ROAD

BATTERSEAHIGH STREET

GEORG

E POTT

ER

HOUSE

ROYAL NAVALASSOCIATIONCLUB

SOUTH

THAMES

COLLEGE

YEL

VER

TO

N R

OA

D

The detailing is thoughtfuland responsive. The dry-stone wall at the front ofthe developmentprovides visual interestand maintains the streetfrontage.

N

12

case

stu

dy

4

TERRACED CAFE(SEE DETAIL)

BELVEDERE PARADE

SOUTH CLIFFPROMENADE

PRINCESS MARYPROMENADE

The ProjectThis project, designed by Bauman LyonsArchitects with the artist Bruce McLean, is fora beach café at the end of the SouthPromenade in Bridlington.

The SiteThe site is a low headland overlooking thebeach about a mile south of Bridlingtonharbour. It lies a little way beyond the point atwhich the shore ceases to be developed withhouses and commands extensive views to thesouth towards Spurn Head as well asnorthwards to the harbour and FlamboroughHead. The character of the shore changes inthis neighbourhood from that of a seasideresort to that of undeveloped unspoiltforeshore.

The ProblemsThe problems faced by this project wereeconomic and social as much as physical. Thecafé is one element in a project whichoriginated in an attempt to reverse the declinein popularity of Bridlington as a holidaydestination. This was understood to have comeabout at least in part as a result of the commonperception of the British seaside town as anold-fashioned place whose gradual physicaldecay and progress downmarket makes it a lessand less attractive place to visit. In order tocombat this view as far as Bridlington isconcerned, East Riding of Yorkshire Councildecided that the collapsing North Promenadeshould be repaired with the involvement of theartist Chris Tipping in order to provide ‘astimulating environment, free and open to all asa truly open space.’ Following the success ofthat scheme, the decision was taken to invest inthe regeneration of the South Promenade withthe involvement of artists, using high qualitymaterials and a high standard of modern design.This meant that the architects were faced withthe problem of finding a form and architecturalexpression which were both bold enough todemonstrate the commitment to quality andmodernity and modest enough to sit happily inthe unspoilt landscape.

The SolutionsThe project as a whole was put together by amulti-disciplinary team who were appointed bythe local authority to draw up a design strategy which was approved by the counciland then implemented under the guidance of a special working group chaired by the leaderof the council.

The café structure itself sits within theheadland, its roof largely covered with turf, sothat from above it is seen only as a railing atthe edge of the drop to the terrace below.The building is in the form of a drum, coveredin stucco and extensively glazed. This echoesthe shape of the headland and provides aprospect to the north and the south. It is alsohighly reminiscent of that architecture of the1930s which itself always appears associatedwith the seaside, without copying it directly.

The glazed screen which makes up the front ofthe building is etched by Bruce McLean andthe use of glass and transparency extend tothe counter inside the café. McLean is alsoresponsible for the Jetty, the brightly colouredsculpture-cum-maze beyond the terrace infront of the building.

Because this is a venue for fine weather theseating occupies the terrace in front of thebuilding, the seats and tables being storedinside the café when it is not in operation.From here there is a view back along thewhole length of improved promenade, andfurther south to the row of beach huts by thesame architects which are the final element inthe whole project. Visually the continuous lineof coloured and inscribed paving stretchesaway towards the harbour. Physically the caféis tied into the project by the angled sittingrefuge in the wall on the terrace, whichprovides shelter from the prevailing wind at alltimes, as do the other such spaces in the sameseries along the whole Promenade.

The implementation of the project as a whole,which involved the artist Mel Gooding as wellas Bruce McLean and Chris Tipping, wasdependent on obtaining outside funds inaddition to those committed by the localauthority. Support was obtained from theEuropean Regional Development Fund andfrom the Arts Lottery Fund, whose monitorsupported it on the basis that ‘The plan isradical in that it proposes a standard of civicarchitecture that refuses to license mediocrityand architecturally bankrupt anomalies for thesake of short term speculative gain…. Thescheme is concerned with changing publicperception of place without didacticpresentation, lumbering explanation orconfrontational architectural design or publicart’. These comments appear to have beenjustified by the completed scheme, which hasbeen widely publicised in the national press, ispopular with visitors and in its entirety hasbeen credited with a twenty per cent increasein tourism in the year after it opened.

The LessonsThis project would not have come aboutwithout championship from officers andcouncillors organised specifically to carry itforward. It demonstrates the ability of sucharrangements to achieve projects of unusualscope and cost against the odds. It also showsthat high quality design and high aspirations canhave popular appeal, as seen by the increase intourism and by the popularity of the newbeach chalets, described as ‘stupendous’ byone visitor.

The design of the café itself demonstrates thatit is possible to combine modesty, boldness,modernity and popularity. The tenant, MrsKendal, says ‘On a sunny day you couldn’tpossibly have a better place to work.’.

Headland Café, Bridlington,YorkshireSeafront regeneration encourages tourists back

NEW FOOTPATH

NEW 450MMHIGH RETAINING

WALL

NEW FOOTPATH

TIMBERSEATING

TERRACE

SEAT AND TERRAZZO SLABINDICATING COMPASS POINTS

OR CITY DESTINATIONS

COLOURED CONCRETERESURFACING TO

PROMENADE

TOP OF BANK

As well as the café, newbeach huts have beenbuilt and improvementsmade to the promenade.

The new headland caféprovides a clear focalpoint for seafront activity.

N N

13

14 15

case

stu

dy

5

The ProjectThis scheme, designed by Jeremy StaceyArchitects, combines a three-storey officebuilding for King’s Lynn and West NorfolkCouncil, two houses and three flats for ahousing association and a public garden.

The SiteThe site is a highly sensitive and difficult one. Itlies in a conservation area, immediately to thesouth of the Grade I listed St Nicholas church.The wall of the churchyard provides oneboundary to the site, which was formerlyoccupied by a 1960s office building that hadcome to the end of its useful life. Next to thechurchyard on Chapel Lane, a corner is takenout of the site by a diminutive listed cottage.Along the opposite edge of the site on ChapelStreet is a terrace of listed houses of twostoreys and attics with dormer windows.

The ProblemsThe challenge faced in designing this schemeinvolved finding a way to incorporate on thesite an office building of sufficient size withoutoverwhelming the existing housing. It was alsonecessary to relate the new housingaccommodation to its neighbours in asatisfactory way and to provide a suitablearchitectural expression for both the office andthe housing. The office was also required toprovide a good working environment andmeet the environmental Agenda 21 objectiveswhich lay at the heart of this project when itwas envisaged.

The SolutionsThe initial decision taken was to build aroundthe perimeter of the site and leave a garden atthe centre. This echoed the historic pattern ofdevelopment on the site. It also enabled thegarden to be used in conjunction with StNicholas church, which houses concerts and

recitals, especially during the King’s LynnFestival, but lacks lavatory or refreshmentfacilities. A narrow gate in the churchyard wallenables concert-goers to use the garden andground floor area of the office building.

The housing parts of the scheme are situatedin two-storey ranges adjoining the existinghousing and echoing its form and materialsthough not attempting to reproduce it indetail. The walls are of high quality brick andthe roofs are slate, but the detailing ofwindows and doors is simple and modern; themetal gutters and downspouts on the dormers,for example, provide visual interest in a novelway as well as serving a practical purpose.

The office building is a range of three storeysalong Austin Street. It is also built of brick, buthas a metal roof, within which are situatedsolar panels to help heat the hot water for thebuilding. The south-facing top storey has astrip of windows running along its wholelength. They provide excellent light for thoseworking at this level, but are sheltered fromexcessive heat-gain by projecting eaves and byinternal blinds within the triple-glazedwindows. The main entrance in the centre ofthis range provides views through the openreception space to the garden behind. Thisgarden will be accessible to the public duringoffice hours via a footpath crossing the sitefrom east to west.

The environmental strategy and constructionmethods adopted have enabled the officebuilding to be naturally ventilated rather thanair-conditioned. High insulation levels and theuse of concrete decks to store and circulateheat and ventilation are employed to create acomfortable working environment withminimal energy needs, and great care hasbeen taken with all aspects of energy use,including water-saving measures. This hasproduced predicted energy costs of £5,000per year, rather than the £23,000 per yearwhich would be expected for a conventionaloffice building of this size, thus providing aconsiderable reduction in the life-time cost ofthe whole project.

The LessonsThis project demonstrates that difficult siteconstraints and a challenging environmentalagenda can be the generators of goodarchitecture. It shows that different uses can beaccommodated on a constrained site in a waywhich enhances the quality of the site as awhole. It demonstrates that a local authoritycan take the lead as an enlightened client tomeet its needs in an environmentallysustainable way. It is also note-worthy that theprofessional and construction team were allbased within the locality.

Juniper House, King’s Lynn, NorfolkLocal architectural patronage delivers sustainable and neighbourly office building

St. NICHOLAS CHURCH

CH

APE

L ST

REE

T

PILO

T ST

AUSTIN STREET

HISTORICWALL

The housing in ChapelStreet is clearly linkedto the larger office rangein colour and materialsbut at the same timeresponds to the scale of adjoining housing.

▲

A staircase detail in theinner courtyard.

▲

The scheme viewedacross Austin Street, pasta medieval gateway.

▲

N

16 17

case

stu

dy

6 Left Bank Village Restaurants, HerefordModern design a less intrusive option than imitation warehouse

The ProjectThe project, designed by Jamieson Associates,was for a single building which houses arestaurant, a brasserie, conference facilities anda bar in Hereford city centre.

The SiteThe site is as sensitive a one as could beimagined, lying on the north bank of the RiverWye, with a long frontage to the river andanother frontage on Bridge Street next to there-built medieval bridge. It is highly prominentin views towards the cathedral from the southbank of the river and in views from both themedieval bridge and from the new road bridgefurther to the west. The site was formerlyoccupied by a motorcycle garage and hadbeen derelict for some time before thisdevelopment took place.

The ProblemsThe central problem in this case was to find aform of architectural expression which wasappropriate to the site. This involved designinga building with frontages which were suitableboth for the narrow historic shopping street ofBridge Street and for the much more openenvironment of the river bank and the broadviews from the bridges. Another constraintwas presented by the fact that any tall buildingon the site would be prominent on the lowsky-line of the city, which is still dominated bythe cathedral. There were also environmentalconsiderations arising from the fact that thesite is on the bank of the river.

The SolutionsThe architect was appointed following advicefrom the planning authority that an earlierscheme closely based on copying an historicwarehouse was inappropriate. This was seen asstylistically wrong in the context of thisparticular site, where there had never beenwarehouses. In practical terms, it meant thatonly half the occupants could enjoy views ofthe river and it did not take advantage of theopportunity to provide terraces. It also led to a

bulky building which obtruded into the skylineand began to threaten the dominance of thecathedral in certain views. In light of this, theplanning authority decided that a modernbuilding which was sensitive to its site was thebest solution.

The building has been designed in three mainelements. On Bridge Street itself there is ablock clad in Bath stone which maintains thestreet frontage and acts, with the buildingacross the street, to mark the end of thebridge. It also provides a suitably dignifiedentrance to the whole building. Running eastfrom this block along the river bank are threestoreys of terraces cutting back as they rise,both from the river bank and from east towest. Within them are the main restaurantand bar spaces. The terraces are exposedconcrete decks and the enclosing walls are ofmetal and glass. Finally, towards the back ofthe site there is a service block clad interracotta-coloured render.

This strategy has produced a building whichdefers to the cathedral and the established sky-line of Hereford because of the setting back ofthe terraces and the recessive colours of thematerials used for them. At the same time itprovides three open terraces with excellentviews of the river. It makes its presence felt ina highly dignified way on the street andmaintains the frontage and scale ofdevelopment. To the rear of the restaurantthere is a courtyard, where the rendered blocksits in an appropriate relationship with otherretail premises in the same ownership, whichtogether with the restaurants are intended tobring about the commercial regeneration ofthis slightly forgotten part of the city centre.

Because of the involvement of the planningauthority from an early stage, and supportfrom English Heritage for the design approachbeing adopted, the proposal was not seen ascontroversial and had a smooth passagethrough the planning process. EnvironmentAgency concerns relating to the river bank did,however, make it impossible to obtainpermission to build a small jetty as had been hoped.

The Lessons This project demonstrates that if all the parties,including the planning authority and thearchitect, are involved in discussions as ascheme develops then even a highly sensitivesite can be uncontroversial when it comes toobtaining planning permission. It shows that amodern building can be less visually intrusivethan a reproduction one, and that theconstraints on a site, and the need to meet therequirements of the brief when it is difficult todo so, can act as generators of excellentarchitecture. Angus Jamieson, the architect, said‘You only get a site like this once in a lifetimeand I am delighted to have designed a buildingfor it that people seem to like’.

STNICHOLAS STREET

R I V E R W Y E

WY

E BRID

GE

BRID

GE ST

REET

KING STREET

GWYNNE ST.

THE CATHEDRAL CHURCH OFST MARY AND ST ETHELBERT

BISHOP'SPALACE

HEREFORDCATHEDRAL

SCHOOL

SITE OF BIRTHPLACEOF NELL GWYNNE (1650)

The elevation to BridgeStreet is clad in bathstone.

▲

The device of cuttingback the terraces defersto the Cathedral in viewsover the Wye Bridgeand produces a buildingless intrusive than animitation warehousewould have been.

The scale and verticalityof the new buildingrelate as much to themodest neighbouringbuildings as to theCathedral.

▲

▲

N

The riverside elevaion ofthe restaurant reads as asmall discrete building,so helping to breakdown the bulk and massof the development.

18 19

case

stu

dy

7The ProjectThis scheme, designed by Haworth Tompkins,is for a commercial office building of 19,000 sqft in the centre of St Helier, Jersey.

The SiteThe site lies on the corner of La Motte Streetand Hilary Street, in the historic heart of St. Helier. It was formerly occupied by a talltower and slab building. This had becomeobsolete in terms of the accommodation itoffered and was of a kind of architecture thathad become highly unpopular in Jersey. It rosefar above the skyline of the city centre andbore little relationship to its setting. Theimmediate setting of the site does not includemajor historic buildings or monuments, but ischaracterised by modest domestic-scalebuildings, with shops, an hotel, cottages and agarage amongst them.

The ProblemsThe architects were faced with the problem ofdesigning a building which would provide officeaccommodation of a high modern standardand would be appropriate in its historic setting.It needed to establish a sufficient presence onthe street to be attractive to a commercialtenant, without having the over-bearingcharacter of its predecessor. It also needed toestablish an appropriate architectural languagefor historic St Helier, where there are fewmodern buildings of quality and localdistinctiveness. It was necessary to do this in away which would achieve the approval of theplanning authority, which was inclined to adoptsomewhat conservative positions faced withsome poor recent developments which werehighly unpopular.

The SolutionsThe first decision taken by the architects wasto build up to the boundaries of the site. Thiswas sensible in townscape terms, because itrespected the historic building lines. It alsoenabled the required amount ofaccommodation to be provided on the site ina much lower building than the previous one.Further studies of the massing of the buildingled to a decision to build five storeys, of whichthe top one was considerably set back. Thisenabled the cornice lines of La Motte Street tobe respected. The main gesture made by thedesign is a tower at the street corner. Thisprovides a suitable marker for the building, andthe glazed tower provides views of peoplegoing up and down the staircase, as well asgiving them views out over the town. It alsohelps to resolve the awkward geometry of thesite resulting from the fact that the cornerbetween the two streets is not a right angle.

Glazing is also the most important element ofthe main entrance elevation on La MotteStreet. Behind it lies an atrium space whichrises the full height of the building. This iswedge-shaped in plan, giving rise to arectangular office building although the wideangle of the corner site is fully built out. This

provides an interesting and impressive foyerand also provides environmental benefit byacting as a buffer between the offices withinand the noise and bright sunlight of the streetoutside to the south. Transparent lifts andgalleries within the atrium space enliven it andprovide interest for those outside and in.Shading and special glazing diminish the heatingeffects of direct sunlight and the yellow blindsadd further liveliness and interest to thestreetscape.

As well as metal and glass the architects madeextensive use of local granite as a buildingmaterial. The building sits on a plinth of thisstone, which is also used for the pavement ofthe street and the floor of the atrium, whichare a continuous surface. It is in the use of thisstone and in its massing and the scale of theelements that Liberte House does most torelate itself to its historic context. It should alsobe noted that the aluminium which is thematerial making up much of the elevations hasthe same tone as the stucco of theneighbouring buildings and therefore blendswith them visually. In the straightforwarddetailing of the metal components thearchitects were intending to produce an effectwhich was appropriate to a port city withutilitarian historic buildings.

This proposal did not achieve planningpermission without controversy on account ofwhat was seen as its uncompromisinglymodern appearance. Once built, it appears tohave been accepted very quickly as a goodcontribution to the townscape of the city andis now widely seen as a benchmark of quality.

The Lessons This scheme shows that it is possible to designa modern office building which sits comfortablywithin a domestic-scaled context but whichalso makes its mark. It demonstrates thattraditional materials used in a new way canrelate a building to its historic surroundings andthat a difficult site can generate interestingarchitecture. It also demonstrates that acontroversial proposal can produce a popularbuilding. Stuart Fell of the States of JerseyPlanning Department says ‘Although it wasopposed by a considerable body of opinion atthe planning stage, this building was widelypopular even before it had been completedand has set a new quality standard forcommercial buildings in Jersey’.

Liberté House, St Helier, JerseyInitial reservations about modern design give way to enthusiasm

LA MOTTE STREET

CINEMA

HOTEL

SCHOOL

SCHOOL

HOTEL

HILGROVE STREET

N

The glass-frontedstaircase is a featureof the building andprovides a successfuldevice for turningthe corner.

Although the floorplatesare at an angle to thestreet, a glass outer skinmaintains the building line.

▲

© H

awor

th T

ompk

ins

20 21

case

stu

dy

8The ProjectThe building, designed by Cullum andNightingale, houses a library, computer-basedlearning facilities, offices, student bar, commonroom and board room for the Central Schoolof Speech and Drama. It represents the thirdphase of a master-plan prepared by thesearchitects, who were appointed followingcompetitive interview. When completed, theplan will rationalise all the school’s currentlyscattered and fragmented facilities andaccommodate them in appropriately designedbuildings on one site.

The SiteThe site immediately adjoins a conservationarea and lies at the point where the residentialarea of Belsize Park meets Swiss Cottage, withits public buildings and main roads. Its narrowfrontage is on Eton Avenue, between the19th-century terrace of villas on AdamsonRoad and the existing Main Building of theSchool, which is of slightly later date. Thehouses are of stock brick with stone dressings.The Main Building is rendered and houses theentrance to the Embassy Theatre up a smallflight of steps. The plot extends to include landto the rear, which adjoins the gardens of theAdamson Road houses and those of BucklandCrescent to the north west.

The ProblemsIn townscape terms, the problem at the frontof the site was to create an appropriate visuallink between the Main Building and theAdamson Road villas. At the rear it was toavoid producing a bulky structure whichloomed over the adjacent gardens. In planningterms the problem was to produce a buildingon the narrow site which would accommodateall the uses specified in the brief in suitable,well-lit, congenial spaces. The library, inparticular, required a large volume space forbook stacks and work stations which would beattractive to readers and would provideappropriate levels of privacy. This building hadto work both alone and as part of the eventualmaster-plan. Neighbouring occupiers hadunderstandable concerns about noise andover-looking. The prospect of considerablenew development in the immediate vicinity,including the building of new premises for theHampstead Theatre opposite, meant thatthere was a changing context to anticipate anddeal with.

The SolutionsThe building is of five storeys on the street.The floor levels are aligned with those of theneighbouring houses and the window openingsare of the same scale, though without anydecorative detailing. The student bar andcommon room in the basement are screenedfrom view by a stone wall which is set awayfrom the front of the building to allow light toenter behind it. This relates visually to thematerials of the adjoining houses, but abovethat level the elevation is built of a rich,strongly-coloured red brick. Apart from a

stone cornice, this elevation is un-ornamented.The adoption of scale and rhythm from theneighbouring domestic buildings shows a good-mannered sensitivity to them. The use of acontrasting material, which is beautiful in itsown right, demonstrates that this is anindependent construction and acts as a foil tothe Main Building on the other side.

The library runs from the front to the back ofthe building and sits as low down as possibleat the rear of the site. It is largely top-lit,which provides plenty of light to desks andwork stations without over-looking theneighbours. The shaping of the building to theirregular site produces a polygonal form whichmakes an exciting space. The offices make thebest use of the available light at the front ofthe building and at the sides above librarylevel, and the staff common room on the topfloor has the advantage of a sunny terracebehind the cornice.

LessonsThis project is working well for the clients andis liked very much by them. Debbie Scully, theDeputy Principal of the School, says ‘We arereally happy with the building and areparticularly pleased that there have been nocomplaints from our neighbours since it wascompleted’. The project demonstrates that it ispossible to incorporate institutional, large-scaleuses within a predominantly domestic contextwithout causing disruption. It shows thatcareful discussions with neighbouring occupiersand the local planning authority and awillingness to compromise can lead tosolutions that take account of externalpressures and constraints but do not weaken abuilding’s character. It shows that it is possibleto combine sensitivity and due deference tohistoric surroundings with confident expressionof individuality and a modern identity.

Library and Administration Building, Central School of Speech and Drama, Swiss Cottage, LondonBridging the gap between domestic and institutional uses

BUCKLAND C

RESCEN

T

ETON AVENUE

ADAMSON R

OADFINC

HLEY

RO

AD

Fenestration at the rearof the building isdesigned to minimiseoverlooking ofneighbouring gardens.

The absence of stuccomarks the building outfrom its neighbours, butin scale it respondsclosely to the 19thcentury terrace inAdamson Road.

▲

▲

N

The library provides alight and pleasantworking environmentand is planned so thatdomestic neighbours arenot overlooked. Frostedwindow panes are alsoused to protectneighbours’ privacy.

1 The ProjectThis project consists of the extension of theparish church of St John the Baptist, Aldbury,Hertfordshire, in order to provide a lavatoryand a parish room in which to hold Sundayschool, choir practice, meetings and socialactivities. The extension was designed byAtelier MLM Architects.

The SiteThe church lies in the middle of a pretty,unspoiled Hertfordshire village. It is listed Grade I and occupies a site which has beenoccupied by a church since Saxon times,although the building itself has been alteredand repaired many times over the centuriesand was heavily restored in the 19th. Thechurch sits towards the north of the extensivechurchyard and is surrounded by a graveyardwhich is open in appearance, with trees andmown grass giving it a park-like character. Theparish room itself lies to the north of the naveof the church at the edge of the churchyardand towards the west end of the building.

The ProblemsExtending a Grade I listed building is alwaysdifficult and controversial, and the difficultieswere compounded in this case by the need torespect the character of the conservation areaof the village, which is so picturesque that it isfrequently in demand for filming and advertisingpurposes. The problem was therefore todesign a building which would be unequivocallymodern in character without jarring with thehistoric church or the character of the village.English Heritage, as well as the local planningauthority, needed to be convinced of themerits of the proposed scheme.

The Solutions The precise site for the building wasestablished as a result of the existence of aformer doorway, now blocked, in the northwall of the church. Re-opening this door was away of providing access to the extensionwithout destroying important historic fabric. Itwas also helpful that the north side of the

church is largely invisible from the village, andthat this position enabled the new room totake advantage of uninterrupted views acrossfarmland. This suggested to the architect thathe should design a room with large windows.

The room is rectangular in plan, but therectangle is twisted so that its sides are notparallel with those of the church. Thisgeometry is unmistakably modern, but it is notarbitrary, because the angles of the new wallsrelate to those of the buttresses of the historicbuilding.

The extension stands next to the church, butretains the integrity of the historic building bybarely touching it with the walls and roof ofthe lobby which links the two and contains thelavatory and a door from which to service theextension.

The structure of the extension takes the formof three levels. The lowest level is a plinth offlint walls with limestone dressings, whichcontinue the materials and methods of thehistoric building as the base for the new one.Above this is a continuous band of glazing,interrupted by timber panels at the centres ofthe walls and timber-framed window openingsbeside them. Timber columns within thisstructure support a beam which itself supportsthe roof structure. This consists of trussescrossing from corner to corner of the roomand sitting on the beam above the glazedcorners. The pyramidal roof is covered ingreen slates.

Throughout the building the quality ofworkmanship is high. This is particularlynoticeable in the case of the timber, which isparticularly richly detailed in the area of thelobby, where the glazing in the door is sub-divided into many small squares. This use ofmaterials to produce square patterns is alsofound in the floor of the parish room, which ispatterned in red and black tiles.

English Heritage officers were closely involvedin the design of the building and their initialconcerns were addressed in the course ofnegotiations. The local planning authority wassympathetic throughout the process to theaims of the project and to the lines of theproposed solution.

The LessonsThis scheme demonstrates that a difficult siteand the restrictions of dealing with a Grade Ilisted building can generate a successfularchitectural solution. It illustrates thattraditional materials and methods can be usedin modern ways. When this is donesuccessfully, as here, it shows that this canprovide a visual link between old and new,without the new copying the details of the oldor pretending to be old. It also demonstratesthat it is possible to obtain the necessaryconsents to extend a Grade I listed building inan exceptionally sensitive conservation area.

Parish Room,Aldbury, HertfordshireSensitive extension to a Grade I listed church

STATION ROAD

STO

CK

S RO

AD

POND

The new parish room isdistinct in form andmaterials from the churchbut does not challenge it.

The frameless windowoffers an unimpededview of the churchyard.

The flint plinth of the newbuilding provides a clearbut understated visual linkwith the church.

The new extension isunobtrusively sited at thenorth of the church. Thedark roof and facade ofthe new extension makeit less conspicuous whenviewed across thechurchyard and prevent itfrom competing with thechurch or unbalancing iscomposition.

22 23

case

stu

dy

9

▲

▲

▲

N

24 25

case

stu

dy

10 Picture House, Exeter, DevonEnhancing a varied historic context through confident modern design

The ProjectThis scheme, designed by Burrell, Foley,Fischer, involved the creation of a two-screencinema in the city centre of Exeter by adaptingand extending a former 1930s bus garage thathad been in use as a furniture warehouse.Because the building provides full disabledaccess, includes gallery space and runs aneducational programme, it was eligible for ArtsLottery funding of almost seventy-five per centof the capital cost.

The SiteThe site of the cinema is on BartholomewStreet West, just inside the line of the Romanand Medieval wall of the city of Exeter. Itsimmediate neighbours include 1970s flats, aVictorian terrace of houses and modernsheltered housing, but within a very slightlywider context lie good 18th- and 19th-centuryhouses, a fine late Georgian chapel and apublic open space. Not only is the siteprominent by virtue of being on a ridge, it isalso within an area that has been developedcontinuously from Roman times, where recentarchitecture shows some of the draw-backs ofadopting a ‘fitting in’ approach, drawingattention to itself by its poverty of detailingrather than blending unobtrusively into thehistoric fabric.

The ProblemsThe problems involved finding an open andwelcoming form for a building containing twoblind boxes. The building needed to create asuitable presence on the corner ofBartholomew Street and Fore Street. Itneeded to accommodate the slope up fromthe front to the rear of the site. In terms ofarchitectural expression, the building neededto find a language which embodied the client’saspiration for stylish modern architecturewithout disrupting the historic setting. Wheredifferent kinds of planning consideration wereconcerned, it was also necessary to assuagethe worries of neighbouring residents aboutpossible noise nuisance. The physicalconstraints of adapting the building thatalready stood on the site also had to becoped with.

The SolutionsThe architects decided to use the existingbuilding to house the two cinemas called forby the brief, one seating about 170 peopleand one seating just over 200. They sit back toback with a shared projection room at firstfloor level.

To the south west of the cinema halls, theextension houses the foyer, lavatories,bar/restaurant and gallery space. The mainentrance on Bartholomew Street gives accessto a two-storey space, with a staircase leadingup to the gallery and bar space clearly visibleon the first floor. This can also be entereddirectly from a door at the back of thebuilding, where the car park is situated. Thisgives a suitable sense of presence and drama

to arrival at the cinema, within what is quite amodest extension to the original building. Theentrances at two levels mean that disabledpeople can reach all parts of the buildingwithout special arrangements being needed.

In townscape terms, these spaces are madevisible externally by large areas of glazingwithin a simple white-rendered form. Themain entrance, which is slightly recessed fromthe line of the building, has the appearance ofa proscenium arch over a stage and is toppedby the name of the cinema in neon lights. Thisgives a particularly welcoming impression atnight, when the cinema is at its busiest.

The long western elevation of the building,diminishing in height towards the back of thesite, has windows which reveal the activitiesgoing on behind them and relate in size to thescale of those spaces and activities. A glazedslit from top to bottom of this wall adds tothe impression of the main entrance as aproscenium arch.

This combination of modest theatrical gesturesand straightforward simple details means thatthe cinema has a strong presence which issuitable to its function without intrudingaggressively into its surroundings.

The design was considered in some quartersto be too modern in style, but carefulnegotiations with the planning authority led toapproval and also resolved the concerns ofthe neighbours about potential nuisance.There have been no problems or complaintsabout noise since the cinema opened.

The LessonsThe commercial success of the cinema since itopened has vindicated the cinema operator’sbelief in the contribution which architecturecan make to commercial success. In the wordsof Lyn Goleby of City Screen ‘The bricks andmortar are as important as the celluloid’.

Architecturally, the cinema demonstrates thatit is possible to be theatrical and modern andrestrained all at the same time. It illustratesthat a difficult site can provide the solutions todesign problems if it is approachedimaginatively. It also shows that a use which isinitially seen as threatening can come to beregarded as a socially highly desirable facility.

C ITY WALL

C ITY WALL (COURSE OF )

C ITY WALL

WE S T S T R E E T

T UD

OR S T R E E T

NEW

BR

I DG

E ST

RE E T

FOR

E ST

RE E T

BA

RT

HO

LO

ME

WS

TR

EE

TW

ES

T

F R O G S T R E E T

THE OLDCHAPEL(HALL )

FR IERNHAYBUR IAL GROUND

Nearby historic buildings:Church of St Mary Steps(left) and BartholomewStreet (right).

The picture houseprovides a distinctivelytwentieth centuryaddition to a high qualitybut also highly variedbuilt context, whichincludes a Georgianchapel.

The proscenium archframing the entranceconfidently proclaims thebuilding, as well asinviting views through tothe foyer and cafe.

▲

N

▲

▲

26 27

case

stu

dy

11

The predominantlystone elevations carryechoes of theneighbouring church.

At the rear of the site,on Little Stonegate, aformer chapel has beencarefully restored.

The ProjectThis project, designed by Panter Hudspith, isfor a 4,500 sq m retail building containing fourseparate units.

The SiteThe development sits on a prominent site nextto St Helen’s church in the middle of York. Itreplaces a 1960s concrete building designed byJohn Poulson and extends through to LittleStonegate at the rear of the site, where itincorporates a listed former Methodist chapel,which had been used as a printing works formany years. Apart from the church, the mostdominant building in the immediateneighbourhood is the 1930s neo-Georgianbuilding which curves along the opposite sideof Davygate and houses the famous Betty’sTea Rooms.

The ProblemsThe problem for the architects was to design abuilding which would meet the requirements ofmodern retailing and would be acceptable onthis sensitive site in a city which has often takena conservative approach to design. At the sametime, it was their ambition to produce a workof high quality modern architecture and avoidobvious borrowings from historic styles.Specifically, the building had to strike a suitablerelationship with the adjacent church and withthe widely differing listed and unlisted buildingsin the immediate vicinity. The Poulson buildinghad done this by echoing the colour of thechurch in the concrete from which it wasconstructed and by echoing its strong verticalemphasis in its expressed structure. It wasadmired by some people because of this, andprevious proposals for the redevelopment ofthe site had been rejected by the planningauthority as banal and of poor quality. Thearchitects were appointed as a result of theinterest aroused by the cinema building theyhad recently designed for York. At the sametime there was an influential body of opinionwhich was uneasy with the concept of anavowedly modern building on the site andwhich favoured a brick building with a pitchedslate roof.

The SolutionsThe architects decided that their buildingshould defer to its setting in three particularways. They set it out on a shallow curve,which echoes the curve of the 1930s buildingon the other side of the street and slightlyopens up views to the church along Davygate.They used the same stone that the church isbuilt from as the chief component of thestreet elevation. They adopted a calm, low keyapproach with a strong horizontal emphasis.This was provided by the exposed frame ofthe building and the slightly projecting corniceat eaves level. At the same time, the non-structural nature of the stone is emphasised byholding it in the exposed metal frame of thebuilding and stepping out the upper floorsslightly over the street. This device also echoesthe form of traditional timber-framed buildingsand thus provides a visual continuity withhistoric precedents as well as emphasisingmodernity. The use of stone panels and glazingon the upper floors represents an innovativeresponse to the retail emphasis on the needfor blind windowless boxes at upper storeys.Control over the appearance of the wholebuilding was maintained by providing a set ofrules for the design of individual shop frontslaid down by the architects and imposed on allpotential occupants.

The progress of the scheme to planningapproval was not entirely smooth, partlybecause of the position of conservationinterests as mentioned above. It was assistedby informal support from the Royal Fine ArtCommission and by the willingness of thearchitects to respond positively to criticismsand suggestions from the planning committee.This was most noticeable at the rear of thebuilding, where a more obviously contextualapproach using brick and regular windowopenings was adopted in place of a variationon the main elevation of the building. Oncethese changes had been made the scheme wasapproved and has been widely admired sinceits completion.

The LessonsThis project demonstrates that it is possible touse traditional materials in conjunction withmodern ones in order to create a buildingwhich is at once contextual and modern andof high architectural quality. It shows that anenlightened attitude on the part of a planningdepartment, coupled with willingness tocompromise on the part of architects and theirclients, can achieve permission for a challengingscheme on a highly sensitive historic site. Itdemonstrates that good modern architecture isnot incompatible with the needs of retailing.Tony Dennis of York City Council said ‘Thisbuilding is seen by many as a most encouragingdevelopment, showing that modernarchitecture can make a positive contributionto the development of the city, while at thesame time being polite towards its neighbours’.

Retail Scheme, Davygate,YorkPatient negotiation achieves approval for modern scheme

The new building ispulled back to revealviews of St Helen'sChurch along Davygate.

St. H

ELEN

'S SQ

UARE

LITTLE STON

EGATE

St. HELEN'S

CHURCH

DAVYGATE

GUILD HALL

RIVER OUSE

▲

▲

N

28 29

case

stu

dy

12

The ProjectThe project, designed by MacCormac, Jamieson,Prichard, is for a Tesco supermarket and car-park in the historic market town of Ludlow.

The SiteThe site was formerly occupied by a cattlemarket, which had taken place there for manyyears but moved to an out-of-town location. Itlies on Corve Street, one of the main streets inthe town, just within the former gateway tothe medieval town (Ludlow is unusual in thatCorve Street continued beyond the town wallsand still does so as an almost unspoilt historicstreet). To the east of Corve Street the siteruns along the south of Station Drive to therailway station itself. Here the historic grain ofthe town breaks down and the only building ofany significance is a large former mill, whichitself is one of the most prominent buildings inthe town after the castle and the church. Fromeast to west there is a slight fall across the site.Because it lies at the foot of the hill on whichthe centre of Ludlow stands, and which risesfrom it towards the south, the site hasconsiderable prominence in views from thenorth and from high land around the town.

The ProblemsThe central problem to be tackled in thisproject was that of designing a large modernbuilding which would sit well on a prominentsite in an unspoilt historic town where virtuallyall the other buildings are considerably smaller.The fall across the site also presentedproblems in achieving access both from CorveStreet and from the other side of the building.

In addition, there was a long and contentiousplanning history behind this proposal. Beforethe appointment of the current architects thishad led to two planning inquiries which failedto achieve approved schemes. The first ofthese inquiries established the use of the sitefor a supermarket and required that thebuilding should be at the Corve Street side ofthe site rather than the railway station side. Itrejected the idea of an out-of-townsupermarket for Ludlow. The second inquiryrejected, on design grounds, three alternativeschemes, two prepared by architects

appointed by Tesco and one prepared by theplanning authority itself. This led to theappointment of the architects of the currentscheme after a small informal competition byinvitation, during which various official bodieswere consulted.

Another element of difficulty was provided bythe fact that Ludlow has an active and articulatecivic society devoted to the protection of itshistoric character, and the long-drawn-outbattle over the site naturally led to a hardeningand polarisation of attitudes. A significant bodyof opinion in the town was never reconciled tothe idea of a supermarket at all.

The SolutionsThe dominant feature of the building is acurving metal roof which follows the contoursof the town by rising from north to south. Inaddition to relating well to the site visually, thisstructurally inventive roof has led directly tothe creation of a building which has nocolumns to interrupt the shopping area andwhich is highly efficient in its use of energy.The only element of the building to sit directlyon the Corve Street frontage is a low towerwhich houses staff accommodation and acts asa marker for the store; the remainder of thefrontage sits behind a low terrace and wall. Aswell as two entrances to the store, it is largelyoccupied by a café which provides activity onthe street. The long frontage on Station Driveis low and is broken by a courtyard which isplanted with a tree and provides a view intothe store.

The main building material used is a hand-madelocal brick, laid in Flemish garden wall bond.This was the subject of extensive consultationwith the local planning authority, which alsospecified that the architect of the schemeshould be retained to supervise its construction.The roof is of stainless steel, coated so that itresembles lead.

The completed building has won over most ofthe local opinion which was opposed to theearlier schemes for the site and even to theidea of a supermarket on the site at all.

The LessonsThe history of this project demonstrates thatperseverance in the face of many obstacles canresult in architectural excellence, even in a typeof building which usually has no design merits atall. It demonstrates that a large modernbuilding can be designed so as to sitcomfortably in an historic town. It shows thatsite difficulties and demanding uses can actuallygenerate good architecture, and that a localauthority, which is determined to do so, canensure that a building is constructed asdesigned with high quality materials anddetailing. James Caird of South ShropshireDistrict Council says ‘We believe that aftermany years of frustration and indecision theoutcome has been a building which fits wellinto Ludlow and which we can be proud of’.

Supermarket, Ludlow, ShropshireAccommodating a bulky use in an historic market town

CO

RVE STREET

STATION DRIVE

CAR PARK

STATION

DRIVE

LUDLOWSTATION

ST LAURENCE'SCHURCH

The supermarket rooffollows the form of theland so that it blendswell into the townscape.

The building continuesthe street frontage onCorve Street, where thebulk of the supermarketis hidden behind a two-storey building containingmore intimate uses, suchas staff accommodationand a café.

▲

The frontage to CorveStreet is composed ofhand-made local brick.

▲

N

30 31

case

stu

dy

13The Bars, ChesterReinterpretation of local vernacular for a volume housebuilder on a complex inner city site

The ProjectThis project, designed by Jane Darbyshire and David Kendall, consists of 248 flats forWimpey Homes.

The SiteThe site is a difficult one. It lies on ForegateStreet, a busy main road at the entrance tothe historic city centre of Chester. At onecorner is a two-storey listed building, thefaçade of which was moved when the roadwas widened in the 1930s, but which stillcontains timbers from the 16th century.Behind the site, across which there is aconsiderable drop in level, lies an historicmunicipal park running down to the RiverDee. Bordering one edge of the site is a rowof late 19th-century listed buildings, comprisinga church and a terrace of houses by theinteresting Chester architect John Douglas.Below the site there are believed to bevaluable archaeological deposits needing toremain undisturbed.

Before the appointment of the architects of thecurrent scheme there were two proposals forcommercial buildings on the site, both of whichwere rejected on design grounds by the localauthority, after critical comment from the RoyalFine Art Commission.

The ProblemsThe problems of this scheme were those ofdesigning a building which would provideattractive and marketable housingaccommodation at the same time as dealingwith the site constraints. The noise at the frontof the site made it difficult to contemplateliving rooms on that side. The listed building onthe corner of the site needed not to beoverwhelmed by the new development. TheJohn Douglas buildings needed a visuallysympathetic neighbour which did not overlookthem from the back. The park required abuilding which did not spoil the views out of itand it was necessary to build in a way whichdid not disturb the archaeological deposits. Amethod had to be found of resolving theproblem of the change in levels across the site.Car parking was also required.

The SolutionsThree basic decisions generated thearchitecture of this scheme. The first was toset back from the frontage on Foregate Street.This helped with the noise from that road. Italso deferred to the listed building on thatfrontage, created a garden courtyard onto thestreet and avoided any possibility ofoverlooking from the street into the flats (thedecision to put kitchens and bathrooms onthis side of the building also helped with thenoise problem). The second major decisionwas to house car parking beneath the buildingbut above the level of the archaeology, withan entrance at the eastern corner of the siteon the Headland, the only feasible point froma traffic management point of view. This madeit possible to accommodate the change inlevels across the site. It also pointed the wayto the final decision, to develop around agarden courtyard at the centre of the scheme,with a lower range to the east in order not tooverlook the rear of the John Douglasbuildings. The flats in the northern range havetheir living rooms overlooking this courtyardand gaining light from the southern aspect.

By using dark red brick as the basic buildingmaterial, with some stone dressings and moreextensive use of dark stained timber, thearchitects have harked back to the traditionalmaterials and details employed in Chester,without producing a building which could bemistaken for an historic one. The open gablesoverlooking the park, for example, echo thehistoric language of Chester and arereminiscent of the famous Rows, but theirform and use to cover and shade balconiesare quite novel. Seen from the park theyprovide a varied romantic skyline which keepsgenerally below the height of the tallest trees.

The LessonsThis scheme shows that it is possible toachieve a building of quality on a site which isconstrained by a large number of apparentlyintractable problems, and that those difficultiesthemselves can generate good architecture. Itdemonstrates that decisions to refuse schemeson design grounds rather than being swayedby considerations of the difficulty of achievinganything in such places may be justified. It alsoshows that historic materials and detailing canbe adopted in ways which at the same timeserve current purposes and sit happily in anhistoric context provided that they arecarefully considered. In this case the localauthority was involved in the choice of brickalong with the development team. Finally, itdemonstrates that an architecturallydistinguished project can make excellentbusiness for a volume house-builder.

Graham Hughes of Wimpey Homes said ‘JaneDarbyshire’s excellent design has helped us toexceed all our commercial targets’.

THE BARS

FOREGATE ST.

GRO

SVENO

R PARK

ROA

D

SUBW

AY

ST WERBURGH'S

RC CHURCH

TELEPHO

NE

EXCH

ANG

E

The relationship of thenew housing to thelisted buildings by JohnDouglas.

The open gablesoverlooking GrosvenorPark offer a modernreinterpretation ofarchitectural detailsfamiliar from Chester’sfamous Rows.

▲

N

Another listed buildingforms the corner of thesite on the Bars.

▲

32 33

case

stu

dy

14 Thorp Architectural Model-Makers’ Studio, Sunningdale, BerkshireImaginative insertion enhances a village setting

The ProjectThis scheme, designed by Corrigan, Soundy,Kilaiditi Architects, involves the provision of anew studio for a firm of architectural model-makers who were already based in Sunningdalebut wished to expand and rationalise theiraccommodation following the acquisition ofanother business.

The SiteThe site is a strip of land, formerly occupied bya garage and motorcar show room, directlyopposite Sunningdale church at the centre ofthe village and conservation area. It runsbetween Sunningdale High Street andWhitmore Lane, just to the north of the pointwhere these two streets merge. The listedchurch is a 19th-century, Venetian gothic brickbuilding with a spire. It and the public houseare now the only two non-residential uses inthe village high street. Except for the church,the neighbourhood consists entirely of two-storey buildings of modest domestic scale andthe site is at the edge of the built-up area ofthe village.

The ProblemsThe design problem involved producing abuilding which would satisfy the clients’ needfor premises which would appeal to theirarchitect clients and promote their business asan architecture-related one, and at the sametime integrate satisfactorily into the village interms of scale and style. There was also a needto re-establish the edges of the site, which hadbeen eroded by the former uses and wascrossed by an informal foot-path. There weretechnical environmental problems to overcomewithin the building in the management of noiseand fumes from the model-making activitiesand from the fact that the site faces south eastand is therefore prone to solar gain throughany highly-glazed elevation.

The SolutionsImmediately opposite the church, the edge ofthe site was re-established by creating twohouses, one formed by converting the carshow-room and one newly designed in aconventional, sub-vernacular style, not by thearchitects of the studio. The entrance to thesite on Whitmore Lane is flanked by a redbrick wall which relates the site to theneighbouring houses. Past the wall is acourtyard, with the entrance block clad inrender straight ahead and the glazed mainstudio to the right. The use of over-hangingeaves, grey glass and blinds enables theproblem of heat gain from sunlight to be dealtwith and adds interest to the architecture. Theintegration of services and ventilation withinthe structure of the building also helps bothwith efficiency and visual interest. Animpressive height is achieved at the front ofthe building without over-shadowing thenearby houses by adopting a roof form thatcurves up from the back of the site. This, too,produces interest in the architecture byresponding to the constraints of the site andhelps the flow of air through the naturallyventilated building.

These clients are members of the localcommunity and are local employers, and thearchitects are also local and known for theirwork in sensitive historic settings. Thisdoubtless helped to achieve a favourablereception for the proposal, but this was nottaken for granted by the client or by thearchitect. They organised a careful programmeof consultation meetings with neighbours andthe local community in which the proposal wasexplained on site. This assisted publicunderstanding of the scheme and helped itsacceptance. Now that it is completed it ispopular locally. The local authority wassupportive of the approach adoptedthroughout the planning process.

The LessonsThis project demonstrates that it is possible toachieve high architectural standards in caseswhere a boring industrial shed would be themost likely outcome. It shows that siteconstraints can generate architectural qualityand it demonstrates that local consultation andan enlightened planning authority can achieveacceptance for a strong modern architecturalidiom in unusual circumstances.

HOLY TRINITYCHURCH

SUNNINGDALE HIGHSTREET

WH

ITMO

RELAN

E

CHURCH ROAD

Services such as ventsare integrated andclearly expressed in thestructure of the building.

The use of brick and thedownward curving roofhelp the new building torelate to its surroundings.

▲

▲

N

▲

34 35

case

stu

dy

15 Victoria Hall, Hanley, Stoke-on-Trent, StaffordshirePicking up cues without resorting to imitation

The ProjectThe project, designed by Levitt Bernstein,consists of the extension and adaptation of aGrade II listed Victorian concert hall in orderto provide better facilities for audiences andperformers. These include bars, officeaccommodation, ticket office, meeting andfunction rooms and lavatories. There was alsoa need to provide disabled access to all partsof the house.

The SiteThe site is immediately adjacent to the existingVictoria Hall, a classical building of the 1880s inbrick and terracotta, and lies within the AlbionSquare conservation area. Its other immediateneighbour, however, is a poor example of arecent post-modern multi-storey carpark.Opposite the site of the extension is apotential development site now in use as asurface carpark, and beyond the Victoria Hall isHanley town hall, like the Victoria Hall a listedlate 19th-century classical building.

The ProblemsThe large problem presented by Hanley towncentre was that of regenerating a tired andrun-down area where life and commercialactivity had been sucked into a new shoppingcentre and the maintenance of both buildingsand public realm had been largely neglected.Within that context the Victoria Hall, whichwas operating fairly successfully as a touringvenue for various sorts of performing arts,including both popular and classical music, wasseen as a potential catalyst for widerregeneration. Hence the local authority’s‘cultural quarter’ initiative, of which this projectis an important part. The problems presentedby the project itself were those of finding anappropriate architectural language to sitalongside the historic building; of joining thenew and old fabric to one another in anacceptable way; and of striking a balancebetween deference on the one hand and theneed to celebrate the improvement in facilitiesand new life for the hall on the other.

The SolutionsThe new facilities are provided in a range ofbuilding alongside the original concert hall. Atroof level the two buildings are joined by aglazed skylight running the length of the rangeand sitting as lightly as possible on the eaves ofthe original hall. Across the narrow atriumbeneath this skylight a series of bridges provideaccess into the performance space, which itselfhas been refurbished.

The space within the new building is conceivedof as one, with a staircase and lift shaft risingthrough it and the various facilities disposed inseparate pods within the space. Maximum useis made of the staircase, landings and bridgesto provide interesting and exciting viewsthrough and out of the building, and the liftprovides convenient access for disabled peopleto all parts of the building.

The exterior of the building pays homage to thelisted building in two ways in particular. In thefirst place its main elevation is set back from thatof the listed building. This not only increases thesense of separation between the two elements,but also serves the practical purpose of creatinga small courtyard in front of the main entranceto the hall. Secondly, in addition to the overtlymodern materials of metal and glass,considerable use is made of terracotta panels asa material to clad the new building. This relatesit in colour as well as material to the listedbuilding, and of course it has an addedresonance as the material of the Potteries.

In its proportions and detailing, however, thenew building makes no concessions to itsneighbour and is entirely of its own time.Elements within the building are expressed onthe exterior, the terracotta panels are hungfrom the façade in a way that underlines theirnon-structural nature, the composition is ofrectangular planes and projections and the flatroof and projecting sunshading are supportedon slender metal columns rising the full heightof the building.

Since it re-opened in 1998 the Victoria Hall hasexceeded all its visitor targets. The culturalquarter initiative, which also includes theconversion by the same architects of a Grade II*listed cinema to provide a theatre, has broughtabout considerable changes in the appearanceand atmosphere of this part of the city centre.

The LessonsThe project demonstrates that it is possible toextend an historic building in a way thatrespects it and at the same time makes apositive contemporary architectural statement.It shows that as a result of such an initiativenew life can be given to the building itself andto its neighbourhood. In the words of DaveChetwyn of Stoke-on-Trent City Council, ‘Thebuilding is considered to be a major success interms of its functioning…In architecturalhistory terms it may be considered the mostsignificant work in North Staffordshire forthree and a half decades’.

TOWN HALL

VICTORIA HALL PUBLICHOUSE

CHURCH

MULTISTOREYCARPARK

ALBION STREET

JOHN STREET

The junction betweenold and new is handledsensitively and with alight touch.

Materials traditional toStoke-on-Trent areextensively used but in anunequivocally modern way.

▲

At the same time asdeferring to VictoriaHall, the newbuilding has to beassertive enoughhold its own in afractured context.

▲

The setting back of theextension ensures that itdefers to Victoria Hall.

▲

N

37

● The best buildings result from a creativedialogue between the architect, client, localplanning authority and others; pre-application discussions are essential

● The local planning authority and otherconsultees can insist on good architectureand help to achieve it.

● Difficult sites should generate goodarchitecture, and are not an excuse for notachieving it.

● With skill and care, it is possible toaccommodate large modern uses within thegrain of historic settings.

● High environmental standards can helpgenerate good architecture.

● Sensitivity to context and the use oftraditional materials are not incompatiblewith contemporary architecture.

● Good design does not stop at the frontdoor, but extends into public areas beyondthe building

● High-density housing does not necessarilyinvolve building high or disrupting the urbangrain and it can be commercially highlysuccessful.

● Successful architecture can be producedeither by following historic precedentsclosely, by adapting them or by contrastingwith them.

● In a diverse context a contemporarybuilding may be less visually intrusive thanone making a failed attempt to followhistoric precedents.

● How does the proposed building relate toits specific site? Is there a positive andimaginative response to any problems andconstraints? Have the physical aspects ofthe site been considered, such as anychanges in level within or beyond it? Areaccess arrangements convenient and existingroutes respected? Can the amount ofaccommodation required be fitted on thesite in an elegant way?

● How does the proposal relate to its widersetting? Are the street pattern and grain ofthe surroundings respected? Are therechanges in height between the existing andnew development and if so how are theymanaged? Will the result enhance ordamage the quality of the townscape?

● How is the density of the proposal relatedto that of existing and neighbouring uses? If there are differences, are they acceptable?

● Has the impact of the building in close viewsbeen assessed? Is it either weak or over-powering? Does it respect the scale andrhythm of its neighbours?

● What materials are used? How do theyrelate to those of the surrounding buildings?

Is the quality as high? Are there interestingcomparisons or contrasts in the use ofmaterials? How will the colours worktogether?

● Is the architecture of the building suitable for the uses it contains? Is it trying to be too grand or pretending to be more modest than it really is?

● How does the architecture present itself tothe viewer? Is there a strong compositionin the pattern of solid to opening in thefaçade? Does the detailing of the materialsshow signs of careful thought or originalityin the way the building is put together?

● What contribution, if any, does the proposalmake to the public realm? If new openspace is created, is it clear that it will providea positive benefit and have a genuine use?

● In the wider setting, has the impact of thebuilding in views and vistas been considered?Does it make a positive or negative impact?Does it form an harmonious group orcomposition with existing buildings orfeatures in the landscape? Does it distractthe eye from the focus of the view and if sodoes it provide something better to look at?

Appraising a ProposalThe case studies and the conclusions arising from them point to certain lessonsfor everyone involved in appraising planning applications. Any such proposal willneed to be considered from a number of different aspects. Design qualityshould be one of the most important of these, particularly if the site lies in aconservation area or is sensitive in some other way. In the final analysis it is truethat there is a subjective element in judgements about design quality andpeople often disagree about what they like. For example, in this publicationeveryone will have favourites amongst the case studies and those they like less.But such differences of opinion and matters of personal taste should not beallowed to obscure the fact that it is possible to arrive at opinions about designquality that are based on objective criteria. There are many ways of doing this,but any such process is likely to include asking the following questions. Theyencompass both the quality of the building itself and its quality as a contributionto the urban design of the neighbourhood in which it is situated:

Further ReadingPPG1: General Policy and Principles, Departmentof the Environment 1997

PPG15: Planning and the Historic Environment,Department of the Environment/Departmentof National Heritage 1994

PPG16: Archaeology and Planning, Departmentof the Environment 1990

By Design: Urban Design in the Planning System– Towards Better Practice, DETR and CABE2000

Better Places to Live – a Companion Guide toPPG3, DTLR and CABE 2001

Conservation Area Practice, English Heritage1995

Development in the Historic Environment, EnglishHeritage 1995

Enabling Development and the Conservation ofHeritage Assets, English Heritage 2001

Informed Conservation, English Heritage 2001

Streets for All: A Guide to the Management ofLondon’s Streets, English Heritage 2001

Street Improvement in Historic Areas, EnglishHeritage 1993

What Makes a Good Building?, Royal Fine ArtCommission 1994

Context: New Buildings in Historic Settings,Architectural Press 1998

ConclusionsThe case studies demonstrate a number of ways in which good architecturecan be achieved on sensitive sites. Equally importantly, they show that mostof the excuses offered for failing to achieve high design standards in suchplaces are not valid. The general, most important lesson from all the studiesis that all successful design solutions depend on allowing time for a thoroughsite analysis and careful character appraisal of the context. This lesson is ofuniversal application. For example, what is appropriate in an area made up ofbuildings of varied types and scales will be different from what can bepermitted in the context of formally laid out streets and squares or an areawith a strong unified character.

The studies also lead to a number of more specific conclusions.

36

38

Text and PhotographyBuilding in Context was written by Francis Golding with photographs byJames O. Davies

Steering group

Sophie Andreae CABE Commissioner

Robert Bargery CABE

Bridget Sawyers CABE

Geoffrey Noble English Heritage

Peter Beacham English Heritage

AcknowledgementsThe architects, planning officers, clients and occupiers of the buildingsincluded were uniformly helpful and supportive of this project. The authorand photographer wish to thank them for their co-operation.

English Heritage is the Government’s statutory adviser on all aspects of the historicenvironment.

English Heritage23 Savile Row, London W1X 1ABTelephone 020 7973 3000www.english-heritage.org.uk

CABE, the Commission for Architecture and the Built Environment, is the champion forarchitecture in England, promoting high standards in the design of buildings and the spacesbetween them.

Commission for Architecture and the Built EnvironmentTower Building, 11 York Road, London SE1 7NXTelephone 020 7960 2400www.cabe.org.uk

Although every care has been taken in preparing this publication, no responsibility or liability will be accepted by CABE or its employees, agents and advisers for its accuracy or completeness.

Further copies of this publication are available from:English Heritage Customer Services DepartmentPO Box 569, Swindon, Wiltshire SN2 2YPTel: 0870 333 1181 Fax: 01793 414 926

Product code XH20186© English Heritage/CABE 2001Designed by Clifford Manlow, English Heritage Design DepartmentPrinted by Westerham Press Ltd

This publication aims to stimulate a high standard of design whendevelopment takes place in historically sensitive contexts. It aims to dothis by example, showing a series of case studies in which achievementis far above the ordinary and trying to draw some lessons both aboutdesign and about the development and planning process. As a result, itis hoped that people will be encouraged to emulate the commitmentand dedication shown by the clients, architects, planning officers andcommittee members involved in the projects illustrated and be able

to learn from their experience.