Today we visited Prado MediaLab in which we presented our WAF project as well as individual projects. They also presented the stuff they do to us and were genuinely interested in our work are interested in collaboration!! We also discussed future projects together and went for a beer after a seminar in the evening, we have said we will keep in touch and we left a book we created with our work in.
We went round the different districts of Madrid and viewed the renovation of a library, Real Academia Belles Artes (19th Century Centre for exhibitions and the Arts) and then to the Conde Duque (contemporary art museum , in converted 18th Century palatial stables)although unfortunately there specific viewing times but we got to see some parts of the building, the reworking of an existing building into something new. We also saw the site for the competition to redevelop an old tobacco factory into a new media and visual arts center.......a competition we may enter!
About Me
Friday, 27 February 2009
Thursday, 26 February 2009
Madrid Trip_day one_26/2/09
Arrived in Madrid today to glorious sunshine and a much warmer temperature than England, almost felt like summer! So far we have taken an overview walk of the gran via, also looking at the Prado and Tyssen Museums, city palace and Caixo Forum as well as Jean Nouvels extension to the Reina Sofia. I have already noticed that Madrid is a very dense city, lots of social housing and mini tower blocks. It has a lively atmosphere and generally feels like a nice and safe city. I will be looking more of the social housing that Madrid has to offer and i intend to see the FOA bamboo social housing block at Carabanchel.
Tomorrow we have a presentation at the Prado MediaLab and hopefully will be shown around by the people there and see what they do!
Tomorrow we have a presentation at the Prado MediaLab and hopefully will be shown around by the people there and see what they do!
Tuesday, 24 February 2009
Sustainable Architecture: Going Natural
Before examining the futuristic scenarios of zero emission cities, it is useful to take a look at architecture that uses natural materials.
Those found in nature would seem to have the lightest impact on the environment. Wood, straw and bamboo are all recyclable, need little artificial energy to manufacture and create no waste products. The materials for Cob (clay, sand and straw ) and Adobe (bricks of earth and straw) architecture can all be locally obtained. There are no synthetic materials or chemicals necessary.
There has been a revival in straw bale construction, and organisations such as the Amozonails hold regular gatherings for straw enthusiasts from around the world. It takes 6000 mega joules to manufacture 1 tonne of concrete and only 115 mega joules to produce 1 tonne of straw. Of course 1 tonne of straw goes a lot further than 1 tonne of concrete. Straw is often considered a waste product and many tonnes are burnt every year, polluting the atmosphere. Straw bale houses can be up to 20% more temperature efficient than traditional homes. David Eisenberg, from the The Development Center for Appropriate Technology has contributed many resources to his popular book “The Straw Bale House”.
The Didimala lodge in South Africa uses 10,000 straw bales, has a planetarium and cinema and is one of the largest in existence. The builders employed a system of post-beam thatch roof structure with a mixture of brick and straw bale walls.
“Earthships” were devised in the seventies, but continue being built today, and are constructed of old rubber car tyres rammed tightly with earth, and arranged in a horseshoe shaped module. The southern walls are angled perpendicular to the winter sunlight, and the other walls insulated by plants or gardens. This creates “passive solar energy”, which warms in winter and cools in summer. The houses are autonomous and independent from utilities. There is always a water catchment system and recycling of gray water.
The High Line by D.I.R.T
On another scale altogether, the large architectural firm, Atkins Architecture, renowned for their elaborate and often extravagant hotel concepts, have come up with a magical solution to an old quarry mine in China. The Waterworld hotel is placed with in the former quarry.
Bristol-based Martin Jochman, who led the design team, says, “We drew our inspiration from the quarry setting itself, adopting the image of a green hill cascading down the natural rock face as a series of terraced landscaped hanging gardens. In the centre, we have created a transparent glass ‘waterfall’ from a central vertical circulation atrium connecting the quarry base with the ground level. This replicates the natural waterfalls on the existing quarry face.”
Waterworld
Barker calls for £6.3bn investment in affordable homes
Economist and housing expert Kate Barker has called on the government to invest £6.3 billion in building 100,000 affordable homes in the next two years.
The call – a bid to kick-start the UK's recovery from the recession - comes from the 2020 Group, chaired by Barker, whose membership includes the National Housing Federation, the Local Government Association, charity Shelter and the TUC.
The group called for the government to bring forward the extra investment in order to save up to 30,000 jobs in the construction industry between now and 2010.
Barker said: "Support for housing today offers excellent value in terms of sustaining economic activity, and reduces the risk of a very severe loss of capacity in the housing and related industries. There is real concern that the present fall in homebuilding is sowing the seeds of the next boom."
She added: "Social housing waiting lists are rising. This package meets a real and urgent need."
David Orr, NHF chief executive, said: "The proposed programme is a one-off chance to stimulate the economy and help meet housing need in one fell swoop."
An RIBA spokeswoman welcomed the call but warned that quality must not suffer.
"Finding new ways to stimulate the construction of new homes can play a central role in kick-starting the UK economy,” she said.
"However, we cannot abandon the drive toward improving design quality, and any financial stimulus must reinforce that goal. We need to ensure we don't lose sight of the need for both quantity and quality, and we believe that architects will be a key part of that equation."
Sunday, 22 February 2009
Peer2Peer review 11/2/2009
> Extend out of box - think about whole space rather than just specified.
> Stirling prize shortlist - evelina hospital
> Google HQ zurich
> Zaha - science center
> Invigoration of space
> Green wall - LINK TO WELL-BEING!
> Foods - activities of hospital
> Light & Sound
> Look @ Prada store - fancy/boutique shops
> USER EXPERIENCE
> Who are children?? learners, curious etc.
> How can the walls, ceiling and floor be changed??
> Digital environment
> Reverse engineer the hospital EXPERIENCE!
> Can the inside go outside??
> Interaction elements
> A story - a place to escape the hospital
> New senses and feelings - a change of mood!
> Stirling prize shortlist - evelina hospital
> Google HQ zurich
> Zaha - science center
> Invigoration of space
> Green wall - LINK TO WELL-BEING!
> Foods - activities of hospital
> Light & Sound
> Look @ Prada store - fancy/boutique shops
> USER EXPERIENCE
> Who are children?? learners, curious etc.
> How can the walls, ceiling and floor be changed??
> Digital environment
> Reverse engineer the hospital EXPERIENCE!
> Can the inside go outside??
> Interaction elements
> A story - a place to escape the hospital
> New senses and feelings - a change of mood!
Refurbishement of Tanner Point, Brookes Estate, London, 2005
This competition winning scheme proposed the rehabilitation of an 1960s tower block.
FATs winning scheme for the Brookes Road High Rise Housing Competition in 2003, proposed the comprehensive refurbishment and extension of an existing high-rise housing block.
The London Borough of Newham are procuring the 6 million GBP building works through a PPC2000 partnering agreement, for which Fat are the lead consultants. The design proposes apartments of various sizes and configurations, with an emphasis on family homes. Flexibility of internal planning is maximised through an innovative building services strategy. Features such as personalised external balconies address the need to fundamentally change the perception of high-rise housing.
FATs winning scheme for the Brookes Road High Rise Housing Competition in 2003, proposed the comprehensive refurbishment and extension of an existing high-rise housing block.
The London Borough of Newham are procuring the 6 million GBP building works through a PPC2000 partnering agreement, for which Fat are the lead consultants. The design proposes apartments of various sizes and configurations, with an emphasis on family homes. Flexibility of internal planning is maximised through an innovative building services strategy. Features such as personalised external balconies address the need to fundamentally change the perception of high-rise housing.
Hobby Huts, Hoogvliet, Holland, 2004 - present.
The hobby huts are low cost structures available for rent on the edge of a park in Hoogvliet, a suburb of Rotterdam. The huts can be rented by local small businesses, crafts people, artists and are part of a larger regeneration project that includes a park and community hall aso designed by FAT.
Estates to look at for inspiration!!
Cult estates
Keeling House, E2, designed by Denys Lasdun. Refurbished in 2000 by Munkenbeck and Marshall. Maiden Lane Estate, NW1, designed by Allan Forsyth. Distinctive and low-rise but in desperate need of refurbishment.
Brunswick Centre, WC1, designed by Patrick Hodgkinson; the residents' list reads like a Who's Who of architecture.
Keeling House, E2, designed by Denys Lasdun. Refurbished in 2000 by Munkenbeck and Marshall. Maiden Lane Estate, NW1, designed by Allan Forsyth. Distinctive and low-rise but in desperate need of refurbishment.
Brunswick Centre, WC1, designed by Patrick Hodgkinson; the residents' list reads like a Who's Who of architecture.
Brutalist towers are worshipped by the young urban crowd
The Culture Minister, Margaret Hodge, has ordered the demolition of an East London sink estate at a time when other brutalist blocks are flourishing. What do the others have that Robin Hood Gardens doesn't? “National importance”, says Steve Bee, of English Heritage, who describes the London housing estates that have been listed as “distinctive and distinguished, with architectural integrity”.
These iconic structures from the Fifties, Sixties and Seventies are now sought-after living spaces for a discerning few with an eye for design and a nose for a bargain. Their brutalist style is worshipped by a young urban crowd, designers and architects.
Erno Goldfinger's 31-storey Trellick Tower, near Portobello Road, is London's most famous piece of ex-council concrete. It has a lesser-known twin by the same architect, the 27-storey Balfron Tower, in Poplar, East London, near Robin Hood Gardens. Both are listed, but the Trellick Tower has benfitted from its location while the Balfron Tower languishes in semi-obscurity. The Balfron is beloved by those who value style over location. Matt Gibberd, the founder of the specialist estate agency The Modern House and grandson of modernist architect Frederick Gibberd, says: “Our buyers would move to an area to live in a block like this.”
A top-floor, two-bedroom flat in the Balfron is for sale at £225,000. It is two doors down from the flat in which Goldfinger lived for a brief time. The imminent refurbishment of the building, together with the Olympic regeneration of the area, means that the price may rocket.
Related Links
* Luxury social housing in London
* Towering challenge
* Vote for the world's best building
To those who find the architecture inherently overbearing, Gibberd says: “It is stark, yes, but the notion of feeling threatened comes from social associations we have with living on an estate. Once you understand the intention of architects like Goldfinger to take city living into the future, it becomes interesting and beautiful.”
Modernism fans looking for a central location favour the Fifties Golden Lane estate, which was commended this year in the Housing Design Awards. It is a budget option for people who long to live in the Barbican next door, designed in the Sixties by the same architects, Chamberlin, Powell and Bon. Flats here cost about 10 per cent less than those in the Barbican, which has always been private. A two bedroom duplex with unusual double-height sliding windows and original parquet flooring is for sale at £485,000.
For some people, a tower block is a tower block, but for aficionados they represent a Utopian vision for urban living. As Matt Gibberd says: “You either get it, or you don't.”
These iconic structures from the Fifties, Sixties and Seventies are now sought-after living spaces for a discerning few with an eye for design and a nose for a bargain. Their brutalist style is worshipped by a young urban crowd, designers and architects.
Erno Goldfinger's 31-storey Trellick Tower, near Portobello Road, is London's most famous piece of ex-council concrete. It has a lesser-known twin by the same architect, the 27-storey Balfron Tower, in Poplar, East London, near Robin Hood Gardens. Both are listed, but the Trellick Tower has benfitted from its location while the Balfron Tower languishes in semi-obscurity. The Balfron is beloved by those who value style over location. Matt Gibberd, the founder of the specialist estate agency The Modern House and grandson of modernist architect Frederick Gibberd, says: “Our buyers would move to an area to live in a block like this.”
A top-floor, two-bedroom flat in the Balfron is for sale at £225,000. It is two doors down from the flat in which Goldfinger lived for a brief time. The imminent refurbishment of the building, together with the Olympic regeneration of the area, means that the price may rocket.
Related Links
* Luxury social housing in London
* Towering challenge
* Vote for the world's best building
To those who find the architecture inherently overbearing, Gibberd says: “It is stark, yes, but the notion of feeling threatened comes from social associations we have with living on an estate. Once you understand the intention of architects like Goldfinger to take city living into the future, it becomes interesting and beautiful.”
Modernism fans looking for a central location favour the Fifties Golden Lane estate, which was commended this year in the Housing Design Awards. It is a budget option for people who long to live in the Barbican next door, designed in the Sixties by the same architects, Chamberlin, Powell and Bon. Flats here cost about 10 per cent less than those in the Barbican, which has always been private. A two bedroom duplex with unusual double-height sliding windows and original parquet flooring is for sale at £485,000.
For some people, a tower block is a tower block, but for aficionados they represent a Utopian vision for urban living. As Matt Gibberd says: “You either get it, or you don't.”
Urban Splash group chief executive Jonathan Falkingham on refurbishing 20th century residential
BD Mag - Refurbishment - October 08
‘The sixties is the hardest nut to crack’
What would make it easier to refurbish or convert notable but undervalued buildings?
Ownership of buildings is the biggest challenge. Getting significant buildings into public ownership is a good first step. The public sector is often interested in saving the building and looking for a partner to do it. VAT legislation could be more flexible. If you’re converting a non-residential building back to residential, you have VAT, which you don’t have on new-build.
Do you think there is a growing public understanding of the merits of 20th century buildings?
I think so. In the UK, we don’t get much education on modernism and how it fits into the history of architecture. There is an increase in knowledge through lifestyle magazines. But modern architecture of the sixties is the hardest nut to crack.
What 20th century building would you like to get your hands on?
There are loads: the Tate & Lyle sugar warehouse in Liverpool, the Boots factory in Nottingham, and some of the great social housing blocks in London such as Robin Hood Gardens.
How’s the Park Hill refurbishment coming along?
Good. We’re doing enabling works and it’s starting to look very dramatic as we clear out all the old tat and get back to the concrete skeleton of the frame.
What impact has the economic crisis been having on Park Hill and other projects?
Everyone’s affected. The shift of focus [away from buy-to-let] is actually for the best because the buy-to-let model of driving regeneration is a bit clumsy.
‘The sixties is the hardest nut to crack’
What would make it easier to refurbish or convert notable but undervalued buildings?
Ownership of buildings is the biggest challenge. Getting significant buildings into public ownership is a good first step. The public sector is often interested in saving the building and looking for a partner to do it. VAT legislation could be more flexible. If you’re converting a non-residential building back to residential, you have VAT, which you don’t have on new-build.
Do you think there is a growing public understanding of the merits of 20th century buildings?
I think so. In the UK, we don’t get much education on modernism and how it fits into the history of architecture. There is an increase in knowledge through lifestyle magazines. But modern architecture of the sixties is the hardest nut to crack.
What 20th century building would you like to get your hands on?
There are loads: the Tate & Lyle sugar warehouse in Liverpool, the Boots factory in Nottingham, and some of the great social housing blocks in London such as Robin Hood Gardens.
How’s the Park Hill refurbishment coming along?
Good. We’re doing enabling works and it’s starting to look very dramatic as we clear out all the old tat and get back to the concrete skeleton of the frame.
What impact has the economic crisis been having on Park Hill and other projects?
Everyone’s affected. The shift of focus [away from buy-to-let] is actually for the best because the buy-to-let model of driving regeneration is a bit clumsy.
Wednesday, 18 February 2009
Sunday, 15 February 2009
Chasing happiness
Mon, 27 Oct 2008 | By Emily Twinch
If you are regenerating and your tenants don’t want to move, who do you call? The stress busters?
That is what Southwark Council has done to help tenants deal with the upheaval of living through a regeneration scheme.
The council is demolishing the 1960s blocks of flats that make up the Heygate Estate in Elephant and Castle as part of a £1.5 billion project. But many of the 650 residents did not want to move, and were concerned about losing their community.
Ola Agbaimoni, in charge of Heygate’s regeneration programme, came up with the idea of bringing in counsellors after hearing tales of distraught tenants, often in tears as they moved out.
‘Moving is one of the most stressful things you can do and if you don’t deal with the stress it can be a pre-cursor to poor mental health,’ she explains. ‘Some people have been on the estate for 35 years – just that change, saying goodbye, it’s very difficult. This is enormous for them.’
The stress busters are from a company called the Happiness Project, which works by providing group therapy and counselling sessions where residents can talk about their worries.
The council has spent £2,000 on three workshops – one last month, this month and one next month. All the 556 tenants left on the estate, who have to be moved by September next year, were leafleted to see if wanted to go to the sessions.
‘It looks at how you manage the change,’ Ms Agbaimoni says. ‘You look at the positives in your life to deal with those things. You need some space to talk about how you are dealing with it.’
About 10 people attended the first two sessions and it will be decided whether to carry on after seeing the success of the third in November.
Some tenants have criticised the move saying it is a waste of money. Ernie Hart, 67, of the Heygate Tenants’ and Residents’ Association, says all the council needs to do is talk to tenants to stop them feeling anxious.
However a similar approach is being taken on the nearby Aylesbury Estate, which is home to 7,500 people. Here the Creation Trust, a charity run by the residents to oversee the development, has brought in public relations firm Hill & Knowlton.
The charity believes getting communication with residents right will be key to the success of the £2.4 billion project, which will see 5,000 new homes built over the next 15 years.
If you are regenerating and your tenants don’t want to move, who do you call? The stress busters?
That is what Southwark Council has done to help tenants deal with the upheaval of living through a regeneration scheme.
The council is demolishing the 1960s blocks of flats that make up the Heygate Estate in Elephant and Castle as part of a £1.5 billion project. But many of the 650 residents did not want to move, and were concerned about losing their community.
Ola Agbaimoni, in charge of Heygate’s regeneration programme, came up with the idea of bringing in counsellors after hearing tales of distraught tenants, often in tears as they moved out.
‘Moving is one of the most stressful things you can do and if you don’t deal with the stress it can be a pre-cursor to poor mental health,’ she explains. ‘Some people have been on the estate for 35 years – just that change, saying goodbye, it’s very difficult. This is enormous for them.’
The stress busters are from a company called the Happiness Project, which works by providing group therapy and counselling sessions where residents can talk about their worries.
The council has spent £2,000 on three workshops – one last month, this month and one next month. All the 556 tenants left on the estate, who have to be moved by September next year, were leafleted to see if wanted to go to the sessions.
‘It looks at how you manage the change,’ Ms Agbaimoni says. ‘You look at the positives in your life to deal with those things. You need some space to talk about how you are dealing with it.’
About 10 people attended the first two sessions and it will be decided whether to carry on after seeing the success of the third in November.
Some tenants have criticised the move saying it is a waste of money. Ernie Hart, 67, of the Heygate Tenants’ and Residents’ Association, says all the council needs to do is talk to tenants to stop them feeling anxious.
However a similar approach is being taken on the nearby Aylesbury Estate, which is home to 7,500 people. Here the Creation Trust, a charity run by the residents to oversee the development, has brought in public relations firm Hill & Knowlton.
The charity believes getting communication with residents right will be key to the success of the £2.4 billion project, which will see 5,000 new homes built over the next 15 years.
Tuesday, 10 February 2009
Important contacts/sites
http://www.heygate-estate.co.uk
http://www.kenharrison.co.uk
mail@kenharrison.co.uk
http://cityofstrangers.wordpress.com/category/heygate-estate/
http://www.wrp.org.uk/news/3698
http://www.wrp.org.uk/news/3637
http://www.lightstalkers.org/galleries/contact_sheet/2000
Mark Lewis
Email: info@marklewisstudio.com
http://www.kenharrison.co.uk
mail@kenharrison.co.uk
http://cityofstrangers.wordpress.com/category/heygate-estate/
http://www.wrp.org.uk/news/3698
http://www.wrp.org.uk/news/3637
http://www.lightstalkers.org/galleries/contact_sheet/2000
Mark Lewis
Email: info@marklewisstudio.com
Saturday, 7 February 2009
Bossom Lecture (RSA) - Richard Rogers
Key points from lecture:
> He talks about living in a an urban world, as in 100yrs ago 10% of people lived in cities, now 50% and in 50 yrs time 75% of people will live in cities.
> The compact city sustainable city: we must rebuild the empty quarters of our cities to bring vitality and security by increasing social mix, improving public transport, encouraging walking and the use of neighbouring public facilities, before expanding into the countryside.
> If we build new towns, rogers says its the middle class, the 'skilled people' that moved out of the city into these new towns leaving the poor - 'architecture is about social conclusion'.
> Sustainable Cities:
- Support a diverse range of live/work uses
- Include both the poor and the rich
- Are environmentally responsible
- Encourage walking and are integrated with public transport
- Are well-Designed
- Are adaptable to change
- Are secure and just
> He talks about densifying cities, but not through tall buildings, with rows of buildings instead of one tall building and lots of car parks.
> According to Rogers 'eco-towns are not sustainable' due:
- lack public transport
- expand into countryside
- less choice
> He asks why aren't our eco-towns in our cities??? this links to my big idea of redeveloping the heygate estate into a sustainable development and mini eco-town or neighbourhood!
> There could be 4 eco-towns in croydon even as it exits right now, he stresses the importance of using brownfield land first!
> THE AMOUNT OF ENRGY WASTED TO DIRECTLY RELATED TO THE DENSITY OF YOUR CITY.
> Cities like shanghai for example because there dense they use less energy, therefore there's a direct relation between densification and sustainability. But shouldn't be too dense and should be well-designed.
> 'We should not build anything outside our cities' - Shopping centers drag out the heart of the city into the countryside - destroys the countryside!
> 95% of the people in london go by public transport.
> We need to celebrate the concept of movement - pompidou center, madrid airport.
> Being able to buildings like a book.
> 30% of people in copenhagen use bicycle transport - culture. A multi-use city.
> Bring activities to a space! MULTI-USE!
> The south-bank has been the biggest change of london in last 15yrs! The liveliness, diverseness, the activities, the culture etc.
> Heritage > cities transform..........Venice has the greatest harmony. Has it got a reason to be there, the debate between different periods. The importance of ground lines, the juxtaposition between the parts of buildings that have long and short lives.
> THE EFFECT OF A BUILDING ON AN AREA! How can a building regenerate and area.
> A city needs borders to create density.
> a WATER CITY!
Arch Daily de Plussenburgh / Arons en Gelauff Architecten - Housing
In 2001, a competition by invitation requested a design for a retirement housing project. The objective of this competition was a design to set a standard of architectural quality for upcoming projects in the ambitious redevelopment of the centre of IJsselmonde, one of Rotterdam’s suburbs.
The design for seniors aged 55 and older was inspired by the forthcoming retirement of the hippie generation. The project embraces its target market’s denial of aging by proposing a playful, coloured apartment block. The building is an exciting configuration of a tower and an elevated slab. The slab volume is elevated 11 metres over the water and opens up a spectacular view onto the existing pond from the adjacent pre-existing nursing home. The minimum footprint of the tower creates space for a garden.
The two main volumes consist of apartments with an uninterrupted span of 9m60, allowing for multiple floor plans and adaptability in the future. An inconspicuous elevator shaft connects the new building to the older one, where medical personnel, cooks and other help are available.
The façades of the dwellings gain a strong, three-dimensional quality through the wavy balconies. The glazed galleries - set with self-cleaning glass - are smooth but very colourful in over 200 different shades.
Tucked beneath the building, a recreational space in the water is accessible through the garden, paved with asphalt to facilitate wheelchairs and scooters. A recurrent grass theme runs through several parts of the project. The bamboo pattern set in the interior concrete walls, the planting scheme of the garden and even the garden carpet on the floor of the recreational space, all play on this theme.
The design for seniors aged 55 and older was inspired by the forthcoming retirement of the hippie generation. The project embraces its target market’s denial of aging by proposing a playful, coloured apartment block. The building is an exciting configuration of a tower and an elevated slab. The slab volume is elevated 11 metres over the water and opens up a spectacular view onto the existing pond from the adjacent pre-existing nursing home. The minimum footprint of the tower creates space for a garden.
The two main volumes consist of apartments with an uninterrupted span of 9m60, allowing for multiple floor plans and adaptability in the future. An inconspicuous elevator shaft connects the new building to the older one, where medical personnel, cooks and other help are available.
The façades of the dwellings gain a strong, three-dimensional quality through the wavy balconies. The glazed galleries - set with self-cleaning glass - are smooth but very colourful in over 200 different shades.
Tucked beneath the building, a recreational space in the water is accessible through the garden, paved with asphalt to facilitate wheelchairs and scooters. A recurrent grass theme runs through several parts of the project. The bamboo pattern set in the interior concrete walls, the planting scheme of the garden and even the garden carpet on the floor of the recreational space, all play on this theme.
What is good urban Design?
What is good urban design?
Good design is not just about making places visually attractive.
* It delivers value for money. Design costs are a small percentage of construction costs, but it is through the design process that the greatest impact can be made on the quality, efficiency and overall sustainability of buildings.
* encourages local community identity over big brand 'anywhere anyplace' anonymity and ensures attention to creating places that respond to people's needs and help community cohesion.
* improves the longer-term "liveability", management and maintenance of the built environment, including public places such as streets and parks, to ensure spaces can stay clean, safe and green.
* contributes to the achievement of sustainable development by respecting historic context, making best use of resources, and being able to respond to change.
Good design is not just about making places visually attractive.
* It delivers value for money. Design costs are a small percentage of construction costs, but it is through the design process that the greatest impact can be made on the quality, efficiency and overall sustainability of buildings.
* encourages local community identity over big brand 'anywhere anyplace' anonymity and ensures attention to creating places that respond to people's needs and help community cohesion.
* improves the longer-term "liveability", management and maintenance of the built environment, including public places such as streets and parks, to ensure spaces can stay clean, safe and green.
* contributes to the achievement of sustainable development by respecting historic context, making best use of resources, and being able to respond to change.
Eco towns
Eco-towns will be new towns which are exemplar green developments of up to 20,000 homes. They will be designed to meet the highest standards of sustainability, including low and zero carbon technologies and good public transport.
Government wants eco-towns to be a model for future development. They have the potential to be a real step forward in how we tackle climate change, helping on the journey to zero carbon homes by 2016, whilst providing the housing which families and communities need. The draft PPS sets out what we think should be the minimum standards which an eco-town proposal must reach, and the mechanism by which the local planning system can make this judgment.
The majority of housing growth has always been in our towns and cities, and this will continue. But we see many strong benefits from having free-standing eco-towns: they will relieve pressure for development in crowded urban areas, and provide green and pleasant places in which families can grow and communities flourish. By building settlements ‘from scratch’, eco-towns will be able to plan and deliver the right mix of housing to meet people’s needs, with infrastructure and services planned around them, while making best use of the latest technology to mitigate their impact on the environment.
Eco-towns are intended to be a combined response to three challenges:
climate change
• The need for more sustainable living
• The need to increase housing supply.
• They offer an opportunity to design a whole town to achieve zero carbon
development, and to use this experience to help guide other developments across the
country.
Suggested additional technologies/approaches on zero carbon
The following specific technologies/approaches relating to carbon neutrality were
highlighted by respondents:
• solar photovoltaics
• advanced gasification
• anaerobic digestion
• biomass systems
• combined heat and power plants
• ground source heat pumps
• onshore wind farms
• solar hot water
• smart metering
• horizontal ground loops using passive solar energy.
Government wants eco-towns to be a model for future development. They have the potential to be a real step forward in how we tackle climate change, helping on the journey to zero carbon homes by 2016, whilst providing the housing which families and communities need. The draft PPS sets out what we think should be the minimum standards which an eco-town proposal must reach, and the mechanism by which the local planning system can make this judgment.
The majority of housing growth has always been in our towns and cities, and this will continue. But we see many strong benefits from having free-standing eco-towns: they will relieve pressure for development in crowded urban areas, and provide green and pleasant places in which families can grow and communities flourish. By building settlements ‘from scratch’, eco-towns will be able to plan and deliver the right mix of housing to meet people’s needs, with infrastructure and services planned around them, while making best use of the latest technology to mitigate their impact on the environment.
Eco-towns are intended to be a combined response to three challenges:
climate change
• The need for more sustainable living
• The need to increase housing supply.
• They offer an opportunity to design a whole town to achieve zero carbon
development, and to use this experience to help guide other developments across the
country.
Suggested additional technologies/approaches on zero carbon
The following specific technologies/approaches relating to carbon neutrality were
highlighted by respondents:
• solar photovoltaics
• advanced gasification
• anaerobic digestion
• biomass systems
• combined heat and power plants
• ground source heat pumps
• onshore wind farms
• solar hot water
• smart metering
• horizontal ground loops using passive solar energy.
CABE
John Sorrell, Chair, CABE
27 February 2006
Publication: Quarter, Issue one, Winter 2005
100 hospitals built by 2010, every secondary school refurbished over the next ten years: Britain is undergoing the biggest public sector building boom for a generation. But pressures of time and money can threaten the principles of good design that are so essential in ensuring that we build to last, says John Sorrell.
What does the government's "respect" agenda have to do with urban design? Or public services with architecture? Well, Britain is building on a scale that hasn’t been seen for 50 years and in all likelihood won’t be seen for another 50. The fact is that the government's aspiration to bring about a lasting change in the cultural, political and social landscape of Britain is tied up with a very real transformation of the urban landscape - from hospitals and schools to libraries and housing developments. Look across the skyline of almost any town and the cranes tell you the scale of physical change under way. But the difference with, say, the office building boom of the late 1980s is that much of this activity is public, either in commission or execution.
Britain is witnessing the largest public building programme for at least a generation. Every city, town and neighbourhood will see a marked change in its fabric over the course of the next decade; many places already have. The question is whether the legacy is one we can be proud of, or whether future generations will look back on this period with little forgiveness, as a time of missed opportunities, or worse.
We face two challenges. We have to ensure that the building programme is fully integrated, with government co-ordinating to produce places that actually work, rather than just a series of individual buildings. And second, we need to find ways to ensure that those groups involved in delivering this programme - from developers to local councillors to health service managers - receive the right incentives to prioritise design quality. So what exactly is happening? Unsurprisingly, the greatest investment is in health and education. One hundred new hospitals are to be completed by 2010, up to 3,000 GPs' surgeries are to be built, replaced or refurbished. Every secondary school in the country, and the vast majority of primary schools, will be rebuilt or refurbished over the next ten years. All this will take place alongside a wide range of other cultural and civic building projects, from new magistrates' courts in Manchester to the Turner Centre in Margate.
On housing, John Prescott's sustainable communities plan - with its proposals for increasing housing supply in the south and housing market renewal in the north - represents the most significant government intervention since Stevenage was designated the first new town in 1946. The explicit aim is to create places that promote the government's wider goals in a range of policy areas from crime to environmental sustainability, and to bridge the huge gap between supply and demand. Over a million new homes are to be built by 2016; projections suggest we will need four times that many over the next 25 years.
And then of course there are the Olympics. £2.4bn will be invested, not only in world-class sporting venues, but in the homes, parks and facilities that the Lower Lee Valley needs for long-term regeneration. So much of the nation’s prestige and image will ride on the Olympic facilities being well designed and perceived.
This building programme is a once in a lifetime opportunity to transform Britain. The majority of buildings currently going up will be in use for at least the next 20 to 30 years; in fact they will probably still be used in 50 to 100 years. Around these buildings, the street patterns and public spaces we create will last for centuries - most towns, from York to Milton Keynes, change their original skeletal shape very little. Most of us are unlikely to be alive when the time to build on this scale comes around again; the structure of new settlements will effectively be permanent.
To illustrate the significance of public building on this scale, it is salutary to think of two previous periods when urban Britain experienced as much change. In the Victorian period, the need to get to grips with the unprecedented urban growth that accompanied the industrial revolution generated tremendous civic pride among the rising urban middle class, which manifested itself in buildings, both public and private, parks and squares. A century on, we still enjoy the results. Anyone visiting Manchester town hall or Lister park in Bradford will see why politicians seek the comparison with their Victorian forebears.
It is equally easy to see, when visiting somewhere like the Heygate estate in London's Elephant and Castle, why politicians are just as keen to distance themselves from the other great period of public building, which began after the second world war and continued into the 1970s. Here the legacy is mixed. While there were undoubtedly success stories - the Royal Festival Hall or the University of East Anglia campus - many people are still living with the results of poor planning and design. Attempts to build the utopian visions of Le Corbusier were exposed as fundamentally flawed in 1968 when the Ronan Point block of flats partially collapsed after a gas explosion. Four people died in the accident that came to symbolise the end of the modernist dream, and the architectural and planning professions have been struggling to regain their reputation ever since.
But we should not be distracted by the success of one building and the failure of another - there were of course plenty of truly dreadful 19thcentury buildings. The point is that we are still living with the legacy of the 1960s and 1970s - good and bad - to this day, and not only in terms of the look and feel of our cities, important as that is. Places matter, and the arguments over the legacy of the postwar boom, both for public services and for society more generally, are well rehearsed.
The modernist experiment faltered. That shouldn’t distract us from the role that good design can play this time around. The postwar building programme showed how easy it was to be driven by targets for spending and speed. These short-term targets squeeze out design quality and lead us to forget we are building for people, whether residents, staff, patients or students. The government cannot afford to make the same mistakes again. It must create budgets and timescales that build in the need for good design; the understandable push to deliver on time and to budget should not force us to compromise on quality. At the same time, the apparent success of the Victorian legacy must not make us nostalgic, afraid to create new forms for new times.
We know that badly designed schools, hospitals, surgeries, parks and homes cost us in the long run. They are expensive to run, unsustainable and hard to maintain. They hinder educational attainment, increase patient recovery times and cost more to police. Well-designed buildings and spaces, by contrast, are cheaper to manage and better cared-for by the people that use them. In schools, the quality of teaching environments and the amount of daylight in classrooms improves pupils’ achievement, while even the design of toilets can have a direct impact on bullying and truancy. In healthcare, something as simple as providing hospital beds with a view can radically reduce recovery times.
To realise these benefits - and minimise the costs - we need early and consistent investment in design. Doing design well requires an understanding of more than aesthetics. Of course looks are important, but the usefulness of the end product is what really matters. Good design is about ensuring that a product - be it a building, neighbourhood or even a city - makes life better for anyone who comes into contact with it.
CABE, among others, has a key role to play in this. We were set up in 1999 as the government’s "design champion," promoting the role of quality design in new buildings. We work to raise the aspirations of clients, developers and the public, and to provide practical, expert support to those building new hospitals, clinics, schools and housing developments. We also aim to highlight success stories, and there are some wonderful buildings being produced across the country. But where things do not pass muster, we are prepared to say so, to put down a marker for what is acceptable and to argue for better uses of public money.
Two thousand years ago the Roman architect Vitruvius suggested three essential elements of a well-designed building: utilitas, firmitas and venustas. Henry Wotton’s 1624 translation - commodity, firmness and delight - remains the classic criteria by which building design is judged. A well-designed building, or anything else for that matter, should be functional, well made and beautiful. But true "delight" goes beyond the issue of beauty; it involves the whole experience of those who use it, and the way it affects the lives of those in the community in which it is based.
As the debate between Charles Jencks and Deyan Sudjic in the June issue of Prospect showed, the idea of the "iconic" building has begun to annoy some architects, and there is little sign of the public clamouring for more of them. Still, we shouldn’t deny the power of the creative architect to come up with something magical that gives the client and the users a result that goes beyond what had been asked for, or even dreamed of.
One interesting idea is the "little icon" - a building or space that becomes a local hero, that locals feel has been designed and built for them. Will Alsop's Peckham library, which opened in 2000 and has proved hugely popular, is a good example - a building which has lifted the spirits of the local community and led to a dramatic increase in the number of library users. And Alsop's recent Fawood children's centre in Harlesden, shortlisted for this year's Stirling prize, looks like another example of a building that will bring brilliance and cheer to a neglected corner of London. These are joyful antidotes to the lowest common denominator projects that are still being produced. They work because they represent a belief or an idea.
The idea has pedigree. The Finsbury health centre, which opened in 1938 and which remains in use and popular today, is an excellent example of a building that represented a belief in a better life for people in what was then an overcrowded and unhealthy neighbourhood. The centre’s architect, Berthold Lubetkin, wanted to create a building that would persuade people to lead healthier lives as well as treat their ailments. As a result, the centre, with its Gordon Cullen murals and lecture theatre alongside its TB clinic, was one of the first integrated health centres in Britain.
Lubetkin remains a valuable model. He was passionately committed to architecture as an art form, and at the same time devoted to creating improvements to a city which would benefit everyone. He used to say, "nothing is too good for ordinary people." That may sound patronising now, but is it such a bad thought for an age in which we are still churning out schools and surgeries that look as if anything will do for ordinary people, as long as it does the job?
Of course the current levels of investment are welcome, but we cannot take it for granted that the money will be wisely spent when it comes to procuring new buildings. For every success story - such as the Jubilee library in Brighton, winner of this year's Prime Minister’s Better Public Building award - there are many projects that are not as good as they should be. The level of care and ambition that creates the best is needed for all new buildings, not just those in city centres. Not all new buildings can be local heroes, of course, but that does not mean we should return to the days of mediocrity. Every new building must be built to the same high standards of the award-winners.
This applies nowhere more than for new housing. The government predicts that nearly 4m new homes will need to be built over the next 25 years. Its vision is laid out in its sustainable communities plan: "places where people want to live and work… They meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, are sensitive to their environment, and contribute to a high quality of life. They are safe and inclusive [and] well planned, built and run."
But turning this vision into reality will not be easy. When you look at the new homes built so far across the country, the future seems anything but bright. House-building is an industry in transition, and things are better than they were even five years ago. But CABE's recent housing audit argued that most new housing developments are not up to scratch; in the south of England we rated as good fewer than 20 per cent; in the north the figure was fewer than one in ten.
It doesn't have to be this way. We already have a viable alternative: medium to high density mixed-use and tenure development built near public transport hubs. High-quality architecture and good urban design can make places that feel like places. Some of the most popular urban areas, from Edinburgh New Town to Mayfair, already fit this model and have done so for centuries.
Recent research by Mori demonstrates the impact of the built environment on our quality of life. Homes, schools, surgeries, streets and parks combine to form an area's "physical capital." MORI found that two thirds of the factors that determine quality of life can be predicted by the quality of an area’s physical capital. If we are concerned about improving quality of life then we must focus more attention on the design quality of our urban fabric.
If there ever were a time for joined-up thinking, this is it. The government's building programme should require the individual elements of the programme - schools, hospitals, doctors’ surgeries, libraries, parks, and housing - to take advantage of each other, and should encourage the relevant departments to find new ways to work together. This might mean, for example, healthy-living centres and schools where services were provided together, and where health and education professionals would be able to see children as whole human beings. But opportunities for doing just that are being lost, even as the new buildings which could enable it are being put out to tender.
About 700,000 children will be born in Britain over the next year. Most will be born in a hospital. They will go on to live in the houses, learn in the schools, and work in the offices we are designing and building today; and they will play, both as children and then with their own children and grandchildren, in public parks, both old and new. There is still time to ensure that the current building programme uses design to give these children a better environment to grow up in.
As the prime minister approaches the end of his time in office, there is much talk about the Blair legacy. One of the most durable - and concrete - will be that of today's public building programme. Building on this scale will change the fabric of urban Britain for at least two generations. Ministers throughout government have committed themselves to making sure all these new buildings and public spaces are well designed, and Tessa Jowell, who has recently been appointed "government design champion," will, we hope, act as a focal point, but co-ordination and aspiration need to permeate throughout government, nationally and locally. And the importance attached by ministers to good design must be reinforced through real incentives to deliver it. The challenge will be to ensure that the other pressures, for speed and economy, do not distract anyone from recognising that it is not enough simply to build; we have to build well.
27 February 2006
Publication: Quarter, Issue one, Winter 2005
100 hospitals built by 2010, every secondary school refurbished over the next ten years: Britain is undergoing the biggest public sector building boom for a generation. But pressures of time and money can threaten the principles of good design that are so essential in ensuring that we build to last, says John Sorrell.
What does the government's "respect" agenda have to do with urban design? Or public services with architecture? Well, Britain is building on a scale that hasn’t been seen for 50 years and in all likelihood won’t be seen for another 50. The fact is that the government's aspiration to bring about a lasting change in the cultural, political and social landscape of Britain is tied up with a very real transformation of the urban landscape - from hospitals and schools to libraries and housing developments. Look across the skyline of almost any town and the cranes tell you the scale of physical change under way. But the difference with, say, the office building boom of the late 1980s is that much of this activity is public, either in commission or execution.
Britain is witnessing the largest public building programme for at least a generation. Every city, town and neighbourhood will see a marked change in its fabric over the course of the next decade; many places already have. The question is whether the legacy is one we can be proud of, or whether future generations will look back on this period with little forgiveness, as a time of missed opportunities, or worse.
We face two challenges. We have to ensure that the building programme is fully integrated, with government co-ordinating to produce places that actually work, rather than just a series of individual buildings. And second, we need to find ways to ensure that those groups involved in delivering this programme - from developers to local councillors to health service managers - receive the right incentives to prioritise design quality. So what exactly is happening? Unsurprisingly, the greatest investment is in health and education. One hundred new hospitals are to be completed by 2010, up to 3,000 GPs' surgeries are to be built, replaced or refurbished. Every secondary school in the country, and the vast majority of primary schools, will be rebuilt or refurbished over the next ten years. All this will take place alongside a wide range of other cultural and civic building projects, from new magistrates' courts in Manchester to the Turner Centre in Margate.
On housing, John Prescott's sustainable communities plan - with its proposals for increasing housing supply in the south and housing market renewal in the north - represents the most significant government intervention since Stevenage was designated the first new town in 1946. The explicit aim is to create places that promote the government's wider goals in a range of policy areas from crime to environmental sustainability, and to bridge the huge gap between supply and demand. Over a million new homes are to be built by 2016; projections suggest we will need four times that many over the next 25 years.
And then of course there are the Olympics. £2.4bn will be invested, not only in world-class sporting venues, but in the homes, parks and facilities that the Lower Lee Valley needs for long-term regeneration. So much of the nation’s prestige and image will ride on the Olympic facilities being well designed and perceived.
This building programme is a once in a lifetime opportunity to transform Britain. The majority of buildings currently going up will be in use for at least the next 20 to 30 years; in fact they will probably still be used in 50 to 100 years. Around these buildings, the street patterns and public spaces we create will last for centuries - most towns, from York to Milton Keynes, change their original skeletal shape very little. Most of us are unlikely to be alive when the time to build on this scale comes around again; the structure of new settlements will effectively be permanent.
To illustrate the significance of public building on this scale, it is salutary to think of two previous periods when urban Britain experienced as much change. In the Victorian period, the need to get to grips with the unprecedented urban growth that accompanied the industrial revolution generated tremendous civic pride among the rising urban middle class, which manifested itself in buildings, both public and private, parks and squares. A century on, we still enjoy the results. Anyone visiting Manchester town hall or Lister park in Bradford will see why politicians seek the comparison with their Victorian forebears.
It is equally easy to see, when visiting somewhere like the Heygate estate in London's Elephant and Castle, why politicians are just as keen to distance themselves from the other great period of public building, which began after the second world war and continued into the 1970s. Here the legacy is mixed. While there were undoubtedly success stories - the Royal Festival Hall or the University of East Anglia campus - many people are still living with the results of poor planning and design. Attempts to build the utopian visions of Le Corbusier were exposed as fundamentally flawed in 1968 when the Ronan Point block of flats partially collapsed after a gas explosion. Four people died in the accident that came to symbolise the end of the modernist dream, and the architectural and planning professions have been struggling to regain their reputation ever since.
But we should not be distracted by the success of one building and the failure of another - there were of course plenty of truly dreadful 19thcentury buildings. The point is that we are still living with the legacy of the 1960s and 1970s - good and bad - to this day, and not only in terms of the look and feel of our cities, important as that is. Places matter, and the arguments over the legacy of the postwar boom, both for public services and for society more generally, are well rehearsed.
The modernist experiment faltered. That shouldn’t distract us from the role that good design can play this time around. The postwar building programme showed how easy it was to be driven by targets for spending and speed. These short-term targets squeeze out design quality and lead us to forget we are building for people, whether residents, staff, patients or students. The government cannot afford to make the same mistakes again. It must create budgets and timescales that build in the need for good design; the understandable push to deliver on time and to budget should not force us to compromise on quality. At the same time, the apparent success of the Victorian legacy must not make us nostalgic, afraid to create new forms for new times.
We know that badly designed schools, hospitals, surgeries, parks and homes cost us in the long run. They are expensive to run, unsustainable and hard to maintain. They hinder educational attainment, increase patient recovery times and cost more to police. Well-designed buildings and spaces, by contrast, are cheaper to manage and better cared-for by the people that use them. In schools, the quality of teaching environments and the amount of daylight in classrooms improves pupils’ achievement, while even the design of toilets can have a direct impact on bullying and truancy. In healthcare, something as simple as providing hospital beds with a view can radically reduce recovery times.
To realise these benefits - and minimise the costs - we need early and consistent investment in design. Doing design well requires an understanding of more than aesthetics. Of course looks are important, but the usefulness of the end product is what really matters. Good design is about ensuring that a product - be it a building, neighbourhood or even a city - makes life better for anyone who comes into contact with it.
CABE, among others, has a key role to play in this. We were set up in 1999 as the government’s "design champion," promoting the role of quality design in new buildings. We work to raise the aspirations of clients, developers and the public, and to provide practical, expert support to those building new hospitals, clinics, schools and housing developments. We also aim to highlight success stories, and there are some wonderful buildings being produced across the country. But where things do not pass muster, we are prepared to say so, to put down a marker for what is acceptable and to argue for better uses of public money.
Two thousand years ago the Roman architect Vitruvius suggested three essential elements of a well-designed building: utilitas, firmitas and venustas. Henry Wotton’s 1624 translation - commodity, firmness and delight - remains the classic criteria by which building design is judged. A well-designed building, or anything else for that matter, should be functional, well made and beautiful. But true "delight" goes beyond the issue of beauty; it involves the whole experience of those who use it, and the way it affects the lives of those in the community in which it is based.
As the debate between Charles Jencks and Deyan Sudjic in the June issue of Prospect showed, the idea of the "iconic" building has begun to annoy some architects, and there is little sign of the public clamouring for more of them. Still, we shouldn’t deny the power of the creative architect to come up with something magical that gives the client and the users a result that goes beyond what had been asked for, or even dreamed of.
One interesting idea is the "little icon" - a building or space that becomes a local hero, that locals feel has been designed and built for them. Will Alsop's Peckham library, which opened in 2000 and has proved hugely popular, is a good example - a building which has lifted the spirits of the local community and led to a dramatic increase in the number of library users. And Alsop's recent Fawood children's centre in Harlesden, shortlisted for this year's Stirling prize, looks like another example of a building that will bring brilliance and cheer to a neglected corner of London. These are joyful antidotes to the lowest common denominator projects that are still being produced. They work because they represent a belief or an idea.
The idea has pedigree. The Finsbury health centre, which opened in 1938 and which remains in use and popular today, is an excellent example of a building that represented a belief in a better life for people in what was then an overcrowded and unhealthy neighbourhood. The centre’s architect, Berthold Lubetkin, wanted to create a building that would persuade people to lead healthier lives as well as treat their ailments. As a result, the centre, with its Gordon Cullen murals and lecture theatre alongside its TB clinic, was one of the first integrated health centres in Britain.
Lubetkin remains a valuable model. He was passionately committed to architecture as an art form, and at the same time devoted to creating improvements to a city which would benefit everyone. He used to say, "nothing is too good for ordinary people." That may sound patronising now, but is it such a bad thought for an age in which we are still churning out schools and surgeries that look as if anything will do for ordinary people, as long as it does the job?
Of course the current levels of investment are welcome, but we cannot take it for granted that the money will be wisely spent when it comes to procuring new buildings. For every success story - such as the Jubilee library in Brighton, winner of this year's Prime Minister’s Better Public Building award - there are many projects that are not as good as they should be. The level of care and ambition that creates the best is needed for all new buildings, not just those in city centres. Not all new buildings can be local heroes, of course, but that does not mean we should return to the days of mediocrity. Every new building must be built to the same high standards of the award-winners.
This applies nowhere more than for new housing. The government predicts that nearly 4m new homes will need to be built over the next 25 years. Its vision is laid out in its sustainable communities plan: "places where people want to live and work… They meet the diverse needs of existing and future residents, are sensitive to their environment, and contribute to a high quality of life. They are safe and inclusive [and] well planned, built and run."
But turning this vision into reality will not be easy. When you look at the new homes built so far across the country, the future seems anything but bright. House-building is an industry in transition, and things are better than they were even five years ago. But CABE's recent housing audit argued that most new housing developments are not up to scratch; in the south of England we rated as good fewer than 20 per cent; in the north the figure was fewer than one in ten.
It doesn't have to be this way. We already have a viable alternative: medium to high density mixed-use and tenure development built near public transport hubs. High-quality architecture and good urban design can make places that feel like places. Some of the most popular urban areas, from Edinburgh New Town to Mayfair, already fit this model and have done so for centuries.
Recent research by Mori demonstrates the impact of the built environment on our quality of life. Homes, schools, surgeries, streets and parks combine to form an area's "physical capital." MORI found that two thirds of the factors that determine quality of life can be predicted by the quality of an area’s physical capital. If we are concerned about improving quality of life then we must focus more attention on the design quality of our urban fabric.
If there ever were a time for joined-up thinking, this is it. The government's building programme should require the individual elements of the programme - schools, hospitals, doctors’ surgeries, libraries, parks, and housing - to take advantage of each other, and should encourage the relevant departments to find new ways to work together. This might mean, for example, healthy-living centres and schools where services were provided together, and where health and education professionals would be able to see children as whole human beings. But opportunities for doing just that are being lost, even as the new buildings which could enable it are being put out to tender.
About 700,000 children will be born in Britain over the next year. Most will be born in a hospital. They will go on to live in the houses, learn in the schools, and work in the offices we are designing and building today; and they will play, both as children and then with their own children and grandchildren, in public parks, both old and new. There is still time to ensure that the current building programme uses design to give these children a better environment to grow up in.
As the prime minister approaches the end of his time in office, there is much talk about the Blair legacy. One of the most durable - and concrete - will be that of today's public building programme. Building on this scale will change the fabric of urban Britain for at least two generations. Ministers throughout government have committed themselves to making sure all these new buildings and public spaces are well designed, and Tessa Jowell, who has recently been appointed "government design champion," will, we hope, act as a focal point, but co-ordination and aspiration need to permeate throughout government, nationally and locally. And the importance attached by ministers to good design must be reinforced through real incentives to deliver it. The challenge will be to ensure that the other pressures, for speed and economy, do not distract anyone from recognising that it is not enough simply to build; we have to build well.
Tuesday, 3 February 2009
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)