ARUP ASSOCIATES
50
ARUP ASSOCIATES
50
006
Introduction
004
009
Essay Total Architecture
033
Projects Arup Associates 1963–2013
Contents
473
The Arup Journals
490
Index
494
Credits
005
50 years have, of course, been witness to considerable change in design practices, in procurement and globalisation. Yet, the core ideas of Arup Associates have remained relevant throughout the history of the practice and indeed relative to the wider industry. Ove Arup’s idea of a “total architecture”, in which architects and engineers inform building concept and design development equally, responds well to today’s demand for complex buildings that need to perform well on many levels. Society’s need for a humane, meaningful and inspiring architecture, continues to be as relevant now as ever before. While the need to build in ways that exploit new technologies and use resources wisely is a necessary priority for the future. At 50, Arup Associates is at an age where there are the beginnings of a legacy. A legacy that thanks to Ove Arup and Philip Dowson’s immense foresight in the creation of this unique collaborative ‘experiment’ still informs our present and future. 006
Introduction Arup Associates 2013
Each generation has interpreted Arup Associates’ mission in relation to its own time but always with the underpinning of shared values and commitment to pioneering design through integrated working. A common DNA which links the studio’s output through 50 years of continuous innovation. Each individual, we are sure, has felt that they are part of a design collaborative that has a unique ethos and shared goals. Goals that are not about individuals’ careers, or fame but prioritise the work above all else. A deliberate focus on how architecture and engineering can contribute to a sense of common good. This catalogue recognises the founding partners who created this unique studio and originally proposed it as an ‘experiment’. The work is a celebration of all the individuals past and present who have uniquely contributed to creating this enduring legacy. The ‘experiment’ looks forward to the next 50. 007
008
Kenneth Powell
Total Architecture: Arup Associates 1963 –2013
009
“ Great architecture is often produced by people who apparently don’t care a damn about sensible buildings”, Ove Arup told an audience at the RIBA in June, 1966. He had just received the Institute’s Royal Gold Medal for services to architecture from its then President, Lord Esher. Arup’s message to the architectural profession was clear: “good design should embody a sensible way of building”. Architecture, he insisted, “is not just a visual art”.1 Sir Ove Arup (1895 –1988; knighted in 1971), who was born in Newcastle-uponTyne of Danish parents, had returned to Britain in 1923, working for the civil engineers Christiani & Nielsen and developing expertise in the design of reinforced concrete structures. From 1934 on, as design director of J.L. Kier & Co., he had become part of a circle including many pioneers of the newly-fledged Modern Movement in Britain, joining the MARS Group and working with the émigré architect Berthold Lubetkin on a number of projects including the Penguin Pool at London Zoo and the Highpoint flats. Arup had considered becoming an architect, rather than an engineer, “but I did not feel sure that I could become a first-rate architect”.2 In 1946 he established the practice of Ove N. Arup, Consulting Engineers – it became Ove Arup & Partners in 1949. Ove Arup’s passionate interest in architecture was reflected in his ideal of creating “total architecture in collaboration with other like-minded individuals” and in the projects he undertook with the leading architectural practices of the post-war years, including Architects’ Co-Partnership, Fry & 010
1 RIBA Journal, August, 1966, pp.352, 355, 358. 2 Ibid., p.352.
Sir Ove Arup visits the Kingsgate Footbridge in Durham during construction in 1963.
3 Peter Jones, Ove Arup, Masterbuilder of the Twentieth Century (New Haven and London, 2006), p.279.
Drew, Drake & Lasdun, Peter and Alison Smithson, and Basil Spence. But in 1963 a new architectural practice which bore his name was launched – to the annoyance of some of his former collaborators, who did not welcome the emergence of a competitor on the scene. The practice employed both architects and engineers: a radical idea at that time. Arup commented: ”architects could not possibly tolerate that they should be employed by engineers, whereas they found it quite in order that architects should employ engineers”.3 The roots of the new practice, Arup Associates, extended back a decade or more, since Ove Arup & Partners had been responsible for the design of a number of industrial buildings, beginning with a factory for Chemical Building Products in Hemel Hempstead, completed in 1955. The Architectural Association school, with which Arup was closely associated, was a natural recruiting ground for architects. The engineer Derek Sugden, who joined Arup in 1953 and became a founder partner of Arup Associates, worked on a number of the factory projects, including the elegant single storey plant for York Shipley at Basildon. But the arrival in the Arup office in 1952 of the young AA graduate Philip Dowson (b.1924) was to have a major impact. Francis Pym (1924 – 2009) worked with Dowson for a time before he established his own practice. “Ove was not an architect, but he understood what was good architecture and he had a desire to create or at least play a significant part in creating it”, Sir Jack Zunz recalls. “There was an implicit objective for 011
excellence, to do better than the others, not to be inhibited by standard practices and to embrace innovation as an objective”.4 Indeed, Dowson, the son of a leading South African engineer, might have considered establishing his own independent practice, having secured the commission for new buildings at Somerville College, Oxford, but he chose to remain with Arup and suggested the formation of a “Building Group”, within the engineering practice. It was led by Dowson up to the time of his retirement in 1989 – he became President of the Royal Academy in 1993 – and Ronald (Bob) Hobbs (d.2006), an outstanding engineer who had joined Arup in 1948. The group developed its own momentum and Dowson and Hobbs “wanted to flex their muscles”.5 So in 1963 Arup Associates was launched, with Derek Sugden in due course as the third founding partner. Ove Arup enthusiastically endorsed the new venture as an expression of the integration of architecture and engineering which he had long espoused. The other guiding principle which was to be fundamental to the operations of the practice was that of teamwork – the emphasis was on the team, not on named individuals. Every project undertaken was – and remains – open to wide debate and criticism within the office in an ethos of shared values. Arup Associates has always been averse to the cult of personality, and prioritised the quality and substance of the work above all else to the extent that the authorship of projects is always assigned to the team, regardless of the contribution 012
4 Jack Zunz, “Arup Associates a personal view”, manuscript, quoted with permission of Sir Jack, who joined Arup in 1950 and was later chairman of Ove Arup & Partners. 5 Jack Zunz, “Arup Associates – a personal view”, manuscript, quoted with permission of Sir Jack, who joined Arup in 1950 and was later chairman of Ove Arup & Partners.
Leckhampton House Corpus Christi College Cambridge, England
CIBA Multi-Purpose Building Duxford, England
of individuals, whether they are leading partners or young associates. Ove Arup recognised the increasingly important part that services would play in the design of buildings and recruited a small team of specialist engineers – quantity surveyors too soon joined the team. A particular area of work which the newly formed multi-disciplinary practice set out to develop was that of university buildings. The Robbins Report of 1963 set out an agenda for the massive expansion of higher education. In fact, the first of the new universities had already opened and older institutions, including Oxford and Cambridge, were set on major expansion. Dowson (who had studied at Oxford and Cambridge) won the commission for the first of three new residential buildings for Somerville College, Oxford, in 1958. Buildings for Corpus Christi College and Trinity Hall at Cambridge, and University and St John’s colleges in Oxford followed, along with commissions from both universities (notably for the Department of Nuclear Physics at Oxford and the development of the New Museums site in Cambridge). Beyond Oxbridge, Arup Associates designed a major building for the departments of mining and metallurgy at Birmingham University, a masterplan and a number of buildings for Loughborough, and buildings for the universities of Leicester, Surrey, Aston and East Anglia. Industrial projects continued to flow into the office, including a striking series of production and laboratory buildings for CIBA at Duxford, on which Derek Sugden worked with Dowson, and facilities 013
for Evode in Stafford. In 1966 Arup Associates began work on the first of a long series of commissions, extending over the next 20 years, from IBM, the American computer giant then greatly expanding its operations in Britain and seeking to maintain a record of enlightened patronage. In 1965 the practice was commissioned by Benjamin Britten to undertake the conversion of part of the redundant maltings at Snape, Suffolk, into a concert hall for the Aldeburgh Festival, a project led by Derek Sugden who, trained as a structural engineer, was later to establish Arup Acoustics and to become recognised as a leading authority on acoustic design. Within a few years of its foundation, Arup Associates had become a major player on the British architectural scene. Arup Associates embodied the ideal of “total architecture” set out by Ove Arup – “total design is the key to the whole thing”, he argued. “Once you have that, everything else follows: the appearance of the job, the siting, its character, usefulness, cost, durability, everything”...6 In many respects, the early factory projects contained many of the elements which were to define Arup Associates’ approach to the design of a wide variety of buildings. Built to quite modest budgets, they were projects “ in which structure and services and their relation to industrial organisation play an important role and do so in a very overt way”.7 Integration of structure and services was the key issue, linked to the creation of flexible production space. Arup Associates’ development of the “tartan grid” was a key move 014
6 RIBA Journal, August, 1966, p.357. 7 Michael Brawne, Arup Associates: the biography of an architectural practice (London, 1983), p.33.
Mining and Metallurgy University of Birmingham Birmingham, England
in this process of integration – the rational grid which formed the logical basis for modern factory design adapted easily to a system in which the structural bays in the grid housed services, leaving the central bays clear for functional use. The system, which has parallels with the work of Louis Kahn – a potent influence on the practice’s work – whose groundbreaking Richards Medical Research Building was completed in 1964, was adaptable in the case of relatively small or very large buildings and provided openended potential for growth. It was clearly as relevant to laboratory as to factory design and was further developed in one of Arup Associates’ ground-breaking early projects, the Mining and Metallurgy Building at Birmingham University, completed in 1966. The building contained laboratories and workshops requiring extensive servicing in terms of power and ventilation. The grid was formed by four grouped columns with spaces for services between them, the services distributed in the 1m depths between the adjacent slabs. One of the first of Arup Associates’ works to be listed, the Mining and Metallurgy Building is architecturally austere, appropriately industrial, with expert use of precast concrete modules. (The practice was pioneering in its use of modular off-site construction methods.) The design strategy for Birmingham was applied again at Loughborough University, not only to the design of laboratory buildings but also to the 1966 masterplan for the entire campus, with a standard square block as the basic unit and buildings designed to be 015
Study-bedroom Somerville Collage, Vaughan Building Oxford, England
adaptable for laboratory, lecture room or administrative office use. The masterplan has proved to be highly successful, providing a sure base for the subsequent growth of the university. The succession of buildings designed by the practice for various Oxbridge colleges might superficially seem far removed from the more utilitarian laboratories at Birmingham and Loughborough – budgets were typically more generous and contexts more sensitive. But the same principle of structure clearly defining spaces (study-bedrooms for students) and the integration of services equally applied, though the practical brief was very different. Designing student rooms, Philip Dowson commented, was about reconciling potentially conflicting demands. The study-bedroom was “a place of work and sleep, a retreat and a place to entertain, a place of privacy yet identifiably part of a larger community”.8 Instead of a large, flexible production or laboratory space, the basic unit of the building was a room to be inhabited by one person. Arup Associates’ expertise in the use of pre-cast concrete was crucial to the development of the structural screen wall (or “exo-skeleton”) which is a feature of all the Oxbridge residential projects. The strategy was satisfying in several respects: it was structurally rational and “honest”, with the structure clearly expressed in the architecture, and equally gave the buildings a sense of decorum which was appropriate to the context. (The concrete mix included French limestone, providing crispness and sparkle to the façades.) This succession 016
8 Architectural Design, April, 1968, p.164.
Model of Gateway 1, Wiggins Teape Wiggins Teape (UK) PLC Basingstoke, England Heavy Plate Shop, HM Dockyard Department of the Environment Portsmouth, England
of college projects culminated in the Sir Thomas White Building at St John’s, Oxford, completed in 1976. Arup Associates, like Powell & Moya, another practice responsible for some oustanding work in Oxford and Cambridge, might have been an obvious candidate for a commission to design one of the new universities of the 1960s. But both practices were heavily engaged elsewhere. For Arup Associates, the design of the workplace remained a major focus. The Horizon Factory for John Player & Sons in Nottingham (1968 –71), a building monumental in scale, highly complex in its technology, was completed to a demanding schedule thanks to the work of Arup Associates’ multi-disciplinary team. One important feature of the project was a services strategy, including the installation of Britain’s first combined heat and power plant, which produced major savings in energy costs – the “energy crisis” of the 1970s saw Arup Associates well equipped to respond to the need for low energy design solutions. Industrial buildings continued to form an important part of the practice’s workload – the workshops for the Royal Navy in Portsmouth and the Trebor factory at Colchester were good examples of its expertise. Corporate offices became an equally significant area of work, with the two Gateway office projects in Basingstoke setting a new standard for workplace design. The first was a bespoke scheme for occupation by Wiggins Teape, in which the structural grid defined room-size office 017
1 Finsbury Avenue Greycoat Estates PLC City of London, England
spaces but provided scope for subdivision and rearrangement as needed. Planted external terraces were part of a project that was very much about design for users. Gateway 2 was very different, in that the offices were designed with letting in mind – this was Arup Associates’ first speculative office scheme (though Wiggins Teape subsequently occupied the building themselves and let Gateway 1). The budget at Gateway 2 was relatively modest, precluding full air-conditioning. Instead, a big full-height atrium drove a natural ventilation system, using the stack effect. Big pre-cast panels incorporated provision for ventilation and lighting. Gateway 2 became a key project for the office in that it led to developer Stuart Lipton commissioning Arup Associates to design 1 Finsbury Avenue, with its dramatic central atrium and pioneering use of fast-track steel framed construction, using composite metal decking, and, soon after, the whole of the first phase of Broadgate. These commissions positioned the practice as a key player on the City offices scene. Broadgate demonstrated the potential for developing large dealing floor buildings, a new building type generated by the “Big Bang” of 1986, within the historic City of London and giving them a context of enjoyable public spaces. 1 Finsbury Avenue, designed and built before the “Big Bang”, was itself successfully adapted by Arup Associates in 1996 – 97 to accommodate large dealing floors. By the mid-1970s the modernist orthodoxies which had dominated British architecture since 1945 were being increasingly challenged by 018
Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) HQ Bedminster Downs, England
9 Brawne, op.cit., p.69.
conservationists, community activists and environmentalists. The mantra “low energy, long life, loose fit” promoted as a new agenda for the profession by RIBA President Alex Gordon in 1971 was one that Arup Associates, more than most practices, found congenial. The offices for CEGB at Bedminster Down in Bristol, completed in 1978, provided an exemplar of low-energy design, using a passive cooling system, with cool night air channelled through voids in the office floors in place of air conditioning. The style of the building, Michael Brawne commented, was “inescapably related to the work of Frank Lloyd Wright... reminiscent of a large Prairie-type house”...9 (Wright, alongside Kahn, injected a clear North American influence into the work of the office.) A similar break with orthodox modernism was reflected in the offices for Lloyd’s of London in Chatham, also completed in 1978, though sweeping tiled roofs and brick elevations were combined with a structural system – the structural bay defined by clusters of columns carrying services – seen more than a decade earlier in the Birmingham laboratories. In this instance, the style of the building was partly driven by a desire to respect the context of adjacent historic naval buildings. The Lloyd’s building, CEGB and Gateway 1, though all designed with a bespoke user in mind, have all adapted well to multi-occupation or, in the case of Lloyd’s, use as a civic headquarters, a reflection of the flexibility of the basic diagram they shared. 019
District Council Offices Babergh, Suffolk Babergh District Council Hadleigh, England
The 1980s saw British architecture coming under the influence of Postmodern fashions imported from the USA. Even practices with deep roots in modernism succumbed to their lure, sometimes to crude effect. For Arup Associates, style – the superficial look of buildings – had never been a significant issue. (Ove Arup’s comment, already quoted, that “architecture is not just a visual art”, was embodied in the philosophy of the practice, which has consistently aimed at creating “signature thinking, not signature style”.) Developing innovative environmental and energy strategies were more important concerns for the practice. Arup Associates projects increasingly pioneered the integration of passive and active low energy design in architecture, as it had historically with building services and structure. 1 Finsbury Avenue, the first phase of Broadgate, Briarcliffe House, Farnborough and the Royal Life building in Peterborough all reflected a continued commitment to rational modern design and environmental concerns. The offices for Babergh District Council, located in the attractive Suffolk market town of Hadleigh, demonstrated the potential for an undemonstrative but not overtly historicist architecture, with roots in the vernacular tradition, to complement an historic context – the project incorporated five listed buildings, sensitively converted to new use. Arup Associates’ perennial concern for integrated design is apparent in the major headquarters building for Legal & General at Kingswood in Surrey, 020
Paternoster Square Masterplan Section Stanhope PLC City of London, England
10 Architectural Review, January, 1988, p.19.
completed in 1988 and equipped with a raft of measures, including a heat storage system utilising the staff swimming pool, to reduce energy consumption. The layered façade was designed to reduce solar gain but its run of pre-cast concrete columns hinted at the language of Classicism, which emerges more overtly in the domed entrance rotunda. The plan of the complex, focussed on two internal courtyards, equally has a Beaux Arts formality but is both practical and enjoyable in terms of the quality of the working spaces it provides. There was certainly a formal order to Arup Associates’ masterplan for the redevelopment of Paternoster Square, just north of St Paul’s Cathedral, which won an invited competition in 1987. Placed ahead of submissions by Norman Foster, Richard Rogers, James Stirling and others, the masterplan (wrote Francis Duffy) “responded directly to St Paul’s and distinguished in architectural terms, as others did not, between what was to be permanent and what could be transient”.10 Despite its “sensitivity to past and future”, the winning project, presented by Philip Dowson as not a detailed scheme but a basis for further development, did not meet with the approval of HRH The Prince of Wales who used a speech at the Mansion House in December, 1987, to call for a complete rethink on plans for redeveloping the site. The Prince encouraged the preparation of an alternative, highly detailed scheme by the Classicist John Simpson. In 1990 the Arup scheme was abandoned in favour of a masterplan by Simpson and Terry Farrell, which itself 021
remained unbuilt. In fact, of all the competition entries comprehensively slated by the Prince, Arup Associates’ was the most respectful to St Paul’s and offered scope to redevelop the failed 1960s development as a lively City quarter. Its stripped Classical form re-emerged in the designs for a large office building for Lloyd’s Bank at Canon’s Marsh in Bristol. The scheme comprised two buildings, one a crescent overlooking the Floating Harbour, the other a circular block with a central courtyard, both contained within monumental façades featuring paired columns on a heavy stone base. This project could be seen, together with the library designed by Philip Dowson, an alumnus of the college, for Clare College, Cambridge (1986), as Arup Associates’ most obvious venture into the territory of Post-modernism, but there are many elements which develop familiar Arup themes – the screen wall with its sun shading and, most important, a sophisticated services programme which includes the use of underfloor ventilation for offices, using dock water for cooling. The completed scheme certainly has “civic presence” – enhanced by its prime location in the regenerated Bristol waterfront. With its numerous bespoke office schemes and advance into the area of speculative office design at Broadgate – where the blocks were designed as “shell and core” structures to be fitted out by tenants – Arup Associates had played a key role in the reinvention of the office building. The practice was also a pioneering participant in the development of the out of town business 022
Broadgate Development Liverpool Street British Land Company PLC City of London, England
park, with its 1983 masterplan for Stockley Park, close to Heathrow Airport. The masterplan envisaged buildings providing for “the centralisation, under one roof, of research and design, product assembly and customisation, and market and consumer services”. With Stuart Lipton, the visionary developer behind Broadgate, as client, Arup Associates designed the first tranche of buildings at Stockley, constructed to a fast track schedule to shell and core for tenant fit-out. Initially, Stockley Park was seen as a light industrial and research facility with companies such as Apple and Toshiba taking space there. (The later development of Stockley, with further phases of buildings designed by Arup Associates, saw it emerge more clearly as an office park.) Here was another example of the practice pioneering the design of what was, in effect, a new building type. The complexity of the Stockley project, built on heavily contaminated land, drew on the skills of a multi-disciplinary team, including geo-technical engineers, landscape architects and transport planners. The 1980s was a time of steady advance for Arup Associates, despite the reverse at Paternoster Square. Arup Associates was not the only practice to attract criticism from Prince Charles. In 1982 it was on a shortlist of three (along with Ahrends Burton & Koralek (ABK) and Skidmore, Owings & Merrill) for the design of an extension to London’s National Gallery. Arup Associates’ submission was the most straightforward of the three, externally well-mannered and focussed on creating good 023
Imperial War Museum London, England
gallery spaces. ABK was eventually selected but the project was cancelled following the Prince’s “monstrous carbuncle” speech in 1985. There was a happier outcome to Arup Associates’ project for the major reconstruction of the Imperial War Museum, completed in two phases between 1986 and 2000 and based on an intensive study of the museum’s future needs and the potential of its historic premises to accommodate change. The practice’s technical resources underpinned its work on a number of historic buildings, including major refurbishments of the Theatre Royal, Glasgow, and the Buxton Opera House, and the renovation of the early 19th century church of Holy Trinity, Southwark, as a rehearsal space, the Henry Wood Hall, for two of London’s leading orchestras. A contaminated brownfield site, as at Stockley Park, formed the location for the 122m long Festival Hall designed for the 1984 Liverpool Garden Festival. The building, a brilliantly economical exercise in lightweight structural design which evoked the spirit of the Crystal Palace and the Palm House at Kew Gardens, was regrettably demolished in 2006. The grandstand at Goodwood Racecourse in Sussex is an equally elegant lightweight structure, its masted fabric roof a landmark on the Downs – the project is an exemplary fusion of architecture and engineering. The 1980s was also a period when British architecture began to go global. Ove Arup & Partners had developed as an international operation and Arup Associates was well equipped to follow suit. (Today the practice 024
has offices in Shanghai, Shenzen, Doha and Milan.) The first significant projects beyond Britain were in Saudi Arabia, which had become a growing market for British architects and engineers. The Diplomatic Quarter Sports Club in Riyadh (completed in 1985) was particularly notable for its intelligent response to the Saudi climate and cultural context. The project provided a variety of sporting facilities within the framework of a series of enclosures linked by pedestrian walkways. The concrete and stone structure of the complex was part of a services strategy to reduce energy consumption. This is an area of design where yet again Arup Associates has led the way, thanks to the philosophy of integrated design, founded on the collaborative work, in a single studio, of architects and engineers, which drives the practice and sets it apart from its competitors. The movement towards low energy design came initially from the “energy crisis” of the 1970s but has received a massive new impetus in recent decades from concerns about accelerating climate change. In the last decade the practice has redefined the possibilities of an integrated service to fulfil its broader potential. This approach of ‘Unified Design’ is seen by the practice “as the mechanism by which to get to the next step to understand how we can minimise human impact and maximise human opportunity”. Philip Dowson wrote in 1980 that “architecture requires us constantly to reinterpret and re-evaluate technology in human and social terms”. Unified design is “people oriented”, addressing the issue of how 025
Druk White Lotus School, Ladakh The Drukpa Trust Ladakh, Northern India BSkyB Sky Studios British Sky Broadcasting Ltd / Stanhope PLC London, England
human culture – including tradition, religion, and the more intangible components of humanity – can be sustained in the face of modernity. It is based on a recognition of the degree to which architecture changes people’s lives: “no other art has the ability to directly enhance the quality of people’s lives; and no other has the capacity to inflict as much misery”.11 Unified design is a response to the environmental crisis of the 21st century but it can equally be seen as a natural development of the holistic thinking which Ove Arup saw as crucial to “total design”. Two recent projects illustrate contrasting approaches to unified design. Superficially, the links between a village school in Ladakh, India, and a state of the art media centre on the outskirts of London might not seem obvious. But the Druk White Lotus School has been, over a number of years, a project which provided a test-bed for the ideas driving unified design and one into which the practice has ploughed its energies and resources. (For those who worked on the project it was “an immensely powerful learning experience for the practice”.) These ideas found expression in a very different context in the BSkyB Studio complex – won in international competition and the world’s first truly sustainable broadcasting and data centre, and the product of team working involving architects, structural and services engineers, and specialists from Arup Acoustics, always close to the heart of Arup Associates. In its early years, Arup Associates 026
11 Arup Associates: Unified Design (Chichester, 2008), pp.54, 22–23.
Etihad Stadium, Manchester (Commonwealth / City of Manchester Stadium) Manchester City Council & Manchester 2002 Manchester, England
sought to humanise the factory. Today, it is addressing the issue of how the demands of the global trade in data – global internet traffic increased sixfold between 2007 and 2012 – can be reconciled with growing concerns about the environmental impact of power-hungry data centres. The Citi Data Centre in Frankfurt, completed in 2008, and again won in international competition, was the first in a series of such facilities designed with greatly reduced energy consumption, and carbon emissions, the objective. The project reduced energy consumption by 25% in comparison with a conventionally serviced data centre of the time using a range of environmentally benign technologies. Always at the forefront of technical advance, Arup Associates eschewed the more obvious expressions of “High-tech” which dominated the architectural scene for a decade or so. More recently, its work has steered well clear of the “iconic” tendency, the pursuit of “pure form”, with rationality and modesty, designing what Ove Arup called “sensible buildings”, a greater priority than the creation of eye-catching landmarks. The imperative for environmentally responsible design has underwritten the practice’s emphasis on substance over style – “architecture is not just a visual art”. A major element in its international workload has been the design of sports venues. Large stadia have become status symbols for cities and entire nations. Arup Associates’ City of Manchester (now Etihad) Stadium, built for the 2002 Commonwealth Games, was mould-breaking in 027
several respects, firstly for its emphasis on spectators rather than corporate events, secondly for a design which allowed for a highly successful (and remarkably rapid) conversion to a football venue after the end of the Games and thirdly for prioritising the quality of the internal sporting and spectating environment. With “legacy” an issue where such costly structures are concerned, the project was a model of economy. The Manchester project informed work on other large stadia, each with its own specific challenges. The King Abdullah Stadium in Jeddah and the National Stadium in Singapore, both completing in 2014, are in each case designed to operate in challenging climatic conditions, both commissioned by wealthy nations but both incorporating low-energy solutions for comfort and ventilation. Arup Associates’ status as a centre for research into innovative building solutions is founded on a belief that “design solutions are generated from fundamental research and experiential goals – from the inside out”. It is this approach that drove the several “showcase” projects, including that which was developed to support Qatar’s bid to stage the 2022 Football World Cup – a mini-stadium designed for low-energy operation, with environmental measures to ensure comfortable conditions for spectators and players. The project helped Qatar to win the bid and fed into the design of the stadia being constructed for 2022. The office development, the Arup Campus, designed by Arup Associates as the Midlands base for Arup, was also a “showcase”. Developer-built 028
Plantation Place British Land Company PLC City of London, England
and addressing normal market criteria, it provided a blueprint for a sustainable, user-friendly alternative to the standard market product at equivalent cost. The holistic approach to design which the Arup Campus project embraced embodied issues of heat and power, the proper use of natural resources, including water, the potential to use renewable energy sources, including solar and wind power, and – a factor too often ignored – the social and commercial value of providing high quality public and meeting spaces within a building. Designing large office buildings in the City of London for speculative letting posed rather different challenges but here again a holistic approach was applied. Plantation Place and Ropemaker Place are thoroughly commercial projects (developed by British Land, a longstanding client) in which issues of delivery, cost, and buildability were to the fore. Together with Watling House, they set new standards for City buildings in terms of sustainability. The environmental agenda has become central to the work of Arup Associates as the practice celebrates its 50th anniversary. Two contemporary British projects, located not many miles apart, reflect the advance of progressive “green” technology but have clear roots in the work of the office over five decades. With the client approaching the practice through Arup at Campus, the Jaguar Land Rover engine factory in Wolverhampton is one of the largest (70,000 sq.m. in phase 1 alone) industrial projects ever undertaken by the practice. The plant has the potential to become carbon neutral and, 029
even in its current mode of operation, produces only a third of the carbon emissions for a production facility of equivalent size. In the centre of nearby Coventry, Coventry University’s new Faculty of Engineering makes an interesting comparison with the Birmingham University Mining and Metallurgy building of nearly half a century ago. Ideas about teaching and learning have changed radically since the 1960s – the Coventry building was won in fierce competition and was designed to deliver “a diverse and rich experience that supports experimental learning”. What the two buildings have in common is the integration of structure and services, with, in the case of Coventry, the extensive use of natural lighting and ventilation as radical features in a laboratory building. Looking back over 50 years of Arup Associates, the elements of continuity in the practice are conspicuous – the emphasis on intellectual enquiry and the development of new ideas, the commitment to multi-disciplinary teamwork, and the profound humanism of the work, characterised by a passionate desire to improve the lives of people. The practice, now with nearly 300 staff working in offices in Europe, the Middle East and China, remains the “model fraternity”of which Ove Arup spoke in 1969 – “we could become a small scale experiment in how to live and work happily together”, he predicted.12 Where will the development of these ideas lead Arup Associates in decades to come? The issue of managing technological advance is clearly crucial: technologically, anything is 030
12 Peter Jones, op.cit., p. 271.
Unified thinking: speculative and multi-layered.
possible. The question is: what should we be doing? Arup Associates’ status as a cooperative, with no external control, allows the practice to evolve, to give younger members of the office their head and to train up a new generation to take over its leadership whilst maintaining continuity of values and approach, perhaps the DNA of the practice. The practice’s range of skills is constantly expanding. At the beginning, it was an alliance of architects and engineers. Today the teams are truly pan-disciplinary; the architects and engineers work with a diverse range of collaborators including mathematicians, biologists, social psychologists and artists addressing the problems of an increasingly fragmented society and a growing environmental crisis. Arup Associates is redefining what total architecture is and should be in a challenging and troubled world.
031
032
Projects
Arup Associates 1963 –2013
033
Aglite Exhibition Stand Olympia P E Buttenshaw London, England 1960 CIBA Araldite Plant, CIBA (ARL) Ltd Duxford, England 1958
1958 Beginnings
1960 1959
1961
House at Monks Eleigh Monks Eleigh, England 1959 Cape Coast Post Office Ghana Ministry of Posts & Telegraph Ghana 1961
034
Smith Kline & French Laboratories Ltd Welwyn Garden City, England 1961
1962
Cannon Rubber Manufacturers Ltd London, England 1961 York Shipley Ltd Factory York Borg Warner Ltd Basildon, England 1962
035
Evode Varnishing Kitchen, Evode Ltd Stafford, England
Point Royal Flats, Bracknell Development Corporation Bracknell, England
1963
1964
1963 Arup Associates formed
1964
Evode Office Extension Evode Ltd Stafford, England 1964
036
Evode Garage, Evode Ltd Stafford, England 1964
Long Wall House Long Melford, England 1964
CIBA Research Laboratory CIBA (ARL) Ltd Duxford, England 1964
CIBA Multi-Purpose Building CIBA (ARL) Ltd Duxford, England 1964
037
Walter Jones Ltd Factory Ashford, England 1964
1965
Leckhampton House, Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, England
Awards 1965 Civic Trust Award
1964 Walton-on-Thames Swimming Pool Walton & Weybridge Urban District Council Walton-on-Thames, England 1965
038
Paper Mill, Jebba Nigeria Coutinho Caro & Co Ltd Nigeria Scotstoun House, South Queensferry Ove Arup & Partners PLC Edinburgh, Scotland
1966
1966
1966
Accra Automatic Exchange, Ghana Ministry of Posts & Telegraph Ghana 1966
Evode VIK Supplies Factory Building Evode Ltd Stafford, England 1966
039
1966
040
Mining and Metallurgy University of Birmingham
Birmingham England
041
042
Awards 2011 Concrete Society Awards Certificate of Excellence Mature Building category 1966 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Winner
Closely related to the practice’s early industrial projects, this laboratory and workshop building on the university’s Edgbaston campus equally influenced subsequent office projects, notably those for Wiggins Teape and Lloyd’s of London. The building makes excellent use of the “tartan grid” to provide for the heavy element of servicing demanded by the brief. A group of four columns where the corners of the precast concrete floor plates meet (each 20 feet square and weighing more than 15 tonnes) provides space for services and ventilation ducts, expressed externally by fume extracting roof vents at the top of the column clusters. Services are then routed horizontally along the 3 feet interstices between the floor plates which form the “overcheck” of the tartan. Driven by the dramatic expansion of higher education which followed the Robbins Report of 1963, the project was designed to allow for future expansion in any direction – it actually doubled in size after the initial commission.
This is a rigorously rational building, with external elevations which express the structure - the bays between the service runs are entirely glazed, using low-cost patent glazing and opening glass louvres, to provide maximum daylight and natural ventilation for teaching rooms. Spaces requiring more extensive servicing are concentrated at the core of the building. Influenced by slightly earlier American laboratory projects by Louis Kahn (a considerable influence on the practice) and Eero Saarinen, the Birmingham project confirmed Arup Associates’ position as a major player in the university building programme of the 1960s – the tartan grid formed the basis for a masterplan for Loughborough University launched in 1966. The building was listed Grade II in 1993.
The modular construction system has 20 feet span floor plates of pre-cast concrete.
The Mining and Metallurgy Building was a pioneering example of Arup Associates’ use of the “Tartan grid”.
Vertical services were channelled through clusters of 4 columns forming the structural grid.
043
1967
044
University of Oxford Somerville College
Oxford England
045
046
Awards 1975 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Regional Award – Southern 1969 Concrete Society Awards Commendation 1966 Civic Trust Award Class 1 Commendation
Somerville College, under the leadership of its then Principal Janet Vaughan, was the client for three phases of construction designed by Arup Associates, the first commissioned in 1958 and undertaken by a team led by Philip Dowson. The college, a late 19th century foundation which attained full collegiate status only in 1960 and was bent on major expansion, occupied a site between Woodstock Road and Walton Street. The Vaughan and Fry buildings, respectively eleven and eight bays long, were both constructed along the southern edge of the college’s main quadrangle, overlooking Little Clarendon Street. Two blocks of study bedrooms were contained within structural screen walls of precast concrete, avoiding the need for solid crosswalls and providing shading to the rooms – the strategy, pioneering in its use of this material, was also applied in the Leckhampton House project for Corpus Christi College, Cambridge (1961–64). The use of precast concrete, the practice argued, gave the buildings “something of the homogeneity of the older stone buildings in the universities”. The blocks sat on a brick-faced arcade along Little Clarendon Street, containing shops – the segmental arches of the arcade were clearly influenced by Le Corbusier’s Maisons Jaoul.
The structural concrete frame of the Wolfson Building is clearly expressed in the street elevation.
A third building for the college, the Wolfson Building, was constructed on the western edge of the site, facing Walton Street, with the residential accommodation elevated above a large common room at ground level. In this case, plate glass bay windows project forward of the structural concrete frame to define a strongly articulated frontage to the street. This diagram allowed for the provision of window seats in the bays overlooking the street, a device familiar in historic Oxford college buildings but used by Louis Kahn in his Fisher house. “Brutalism among the ladies” was Pevsner’s comment – he considered the architecture of Wolfson excessively expressive and preferred the “much more elegant” Vaughan and Fry buildings. But Arup Associates’ work at Somerville remains significant as a whole for its contribution to the city’s evolving streetscape as much as to the life of the college. The Wolfson Building was listed Grade II in 2009.
The projecting window bays in the Wolfson Building at Somerville College allow for the provision of seats overlooking the street.
047
048
In both buildings, the structural concrete frame stands proud of the study-bedrooms, providing shade for the residents.
The Fry and Vaughan Buildings at Somerville College are elevated on an arcade along Little Clarendon Street.
049
1967
050
Snape Maltings Concert Hall Aldeburgh Festival of Music & the Arts
Aldeburgh England
1967
051
052
Awards 1968 Civic Trust Award Winner
below top: The seating for the Maltings Concert Hall was inspired by that in Wagner’s Festspielhaus at Bayreuth. below bottom: The concert hall was created within the retained brick walls of the 19th century Maltings.
The Aldeburgh Music Festival was launched by composer Benjamin Britten in 1948, with concerts initially held in Aldeburgh’s Jubilee Hall and parish church. Britten conceived the idea of converting the largest of the malt houses in the complex of maltings at Snape, a few miles from Aldeburgh, which was closing after a century of production, into a large concert hall, complete with excellent facilities for performers and audience. Arup Associates was appointed to the project in 1965, the aim being to have the hall functioning for the 1967 Festival. It was opened by HM The Queen in June, 1967. By demolishing internal divisions, a space 134 ft (40.8m) long and 58 ft (17.6m) wide was created within the existing walls (which were raised by 2ft/0.6m), with seating for 830 people. A low bay along the north side of the space was retained and converted into a foyer, leading to a restaurant/bar set above dressing rooms. The concert hall was given a new roof, on a steeper pitch than the original roof, with tension members in high tensile steel supporting timber trusses. Its boarded timber lining contributed to the creation of an acoustic specified by Britten – more resonant, for example, than that
of London’s Royal Festival Hall. Every effort was made to preserve something of the industrial aesthetic of the building – the brick walls of the auditorium were simply grit blasted and sealed and plush seating was rejected in favour of simple timber and rush seats reflecting a local tradition but actually inspired by the seating in the Festspielhaus at Bayreuth. Externally, the roof ventilators were a close copy of the originals, but now used to extract stale air from the concert hall. On the eve of the 1969 Aldeburgh Festival, the hall was gutted by fire, leaving only the external walls standing, but it was rebuilt within a year, with only minor changes to the original designs and opened for the 1970 Festival. It is now an all-year venue serving a wide audience from across East Anglia. Arup Associates returned to Snape to convert an adjacent part of the maltings complex to house the Pears-Britten School of Music, opened in 1979.
The new roof of the concert hall was constructed with high tensile steel members supporting timber trusses.
053
Beautiful in use
01
054
Beauty is a subjective concept. Ove Arup insisted that architecture was “not just a visual art”. Architecture cannot be purely about aesthetics – the way a building looks. For Arup Associates, a building has to be beautiful in use, a place which enriches the lives of those who use it. It is a matter of engaging with users, exploring their needs and aspirations, and designing buildings which perform well for those who live, work or study in them. The pursuit of pure form, the quest for the “iconic”, has never been part of the practice’s agenda. Nor has the celebration of technology for its own sake. Technology, Arup Associates has always believed, should be used to create better buildings for people. This credo is reflected in outstanding workplaces, enjoyable environments, such as the offices for Lloyd’s in Chatham, now in new use as civic offices.
Arup Associates Six Themes
At Broadgate, the practice not only pioneered a new building type, revolutionising office design – it also created a new City quarter, with generous public spaces open to all. In addressing a project, the priority is always the needs of the users. The old modernist belief in functionalism is redefined in terms of a new humanism. So the Etihad Stadium in Manchester was designed with the spectator in mind. The result was a venue which had true legacy value and which is now recognised as one of the most enjoyable stadia in Europe. Designing for people makes practical sense, whether the project in question is a 60,000 seat stadium, a City office block or a private home, such as the House with No Name, a remarkable exercise in working with a client to make an ideal environment for family life in tune with its natural context.
055
Boulton House Trinity Hall, Cambridge Cambridge, England 1968 Civil Engineering Building University of Loughborough Loughborough, England 1968
1968
St James’s Park Sports Stadium City of Newcastle-Upon-Tyne Newcastle-Upon-Tyne England 1968
Penguin Books Warehouse Penguin Books Ltd London, England 1968
056
Zunz House, Drax Avenue, Wimbledon J.Zunz, Esq London, England 1969
1969 1970
Department of Chemical Engineering University of Loughborough Loughborough, England 1970
Arts & Commerce Building University of Birmingham Birmingham, England 1970
057
Keble Triangle University of Oxford Oxford, England 1970
Nuclear Physics Building University of Oxford Oxford, England 1970
1971
New Museums University of Cambridge Cambridge, England 1971
058
Awards 1974 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Commendation
Oxford Mail and Times Ltd Oxford, England 1971
Awards 1973 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Commendation 1972 Civic Trust Award Award B Financial Times Awards Commendation, Industrial Architecture Category
Teaching Block, Guildford University of Surrey Guildford, England 1971 Sports Hall University of Surrey Guildford, England 1971
059
1971
060
Horizon Factory John Player & Sons Ltd
Nottingham England
061
062
Awards 1973 Financial Times Awards Winner Industrial Architecture Category 1972 Civic Trust Award Winner Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Winner
John Player began making cigarettes in Nottingham in 1877 and the business grew into a complex of factories at Radford, close to the city centre. In 1971 it moved its operations to the new factory, designed by Arup Associates, at Lenton, on the edge of the conurbation. The multi-disciplinary team produced a building which is an exemplary marriage of architecture and engineering in the best traditions of the practice. The brief called for a very large, unobstructed production space and for a sophisticated servicing strategy to create an environment with highly controlled humidity. (Tobacco companies paid tax – Player’s at the rate of £1.25 million a day – on the basis of the weight of the tobacco used and this varied greatly with moisture content.) The design of the building was based on the use of a repeatable module 100 feet square – 36 units in total with an area of 1.35 million square feet.
On the upper production level columns are spaced at 100 feet intervals. Packing, storage, staff facilities, and office spaces are located on lower levels. The importance of services design in the project is reflected in the massive power house (run on newly available supplies of North Sea gas – waste heat recycling was one of the innovative features of the project). The building is a temple of industry in the tradition of Behrens’ turbine factory – and the nearby production buildings of Boots’ the Chemist, designed by Owen Williams. Huge panels of pre-cast concrete, tooled to produce a distinctive texture, contrast with the painted steel roof trusses. Powerfully modelled external escape stairs add to the impression of monumental strength.
Section through the Horizon factory showing the lofty production level with parking, storage and administrative spaces below.
The powerful aesthetic of the Horizon Factory contrasts panels of tooled precast concrete with massive steel roof trusses.
063
Floor plan with industrial process flow diagram superimposed.
The main production floor is a lofty understated space with carefully integrated artificial and natural day lighting.
064
The combined heat and power plant of the Horizon Factory is a spectacular space. The building was equipped with an innovative heat recycling system.
065
HM Dockyard Portsmouth Masterplan HMG Department of the Environment Portsmouth, England 1971
HM Dockyard Maintenance Centre HMG Department of the Environment Portsmouth, England 1971
Attenborough Building, Arts & Social Science, University of Leicester Leicester, England 1971
066
Awards 1972 Civic Trust Award Commendation, Award B
IBM HQ Building IBM (S.Africa) Johannesburg, South Africa 1971
1972
Penguin Books Office, Bath Road Penguin Books Ltd London, England 1972
Awards 1973 Concrete Society Awards Special mention Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Commendation
067
1972
068
IBM (UK) Ltd
Havant England
069
IBM Havant Assembly Building – The interior finishes and services were carefully detailed. Illustrated is the specially designed multi-service trunking, suspended from the concrete roof slabs above, providing air conditioning and lighting.
070
Awards 1977 National Coal Board (NCB) (IEA Services) Ltd Premier Award 1972 Financial Times Awards Industrial Architecture Category Structural Steel Design Award
The international computer giant IBM developed a major presence in Britain from the 1960s onwards, establishing a manufacturing base and expanding its British headquarters, initially based in London. The company’s strategy was to concentrate its operations on two sites close to Portsmouth, at Cosham (North Harbour), on land previously used by the Royal Navy, and at nearby Havant. IBM envisaged future expansion of its business and rapid development of computer technology, which would demand maximum flexibility in its buildings. Between 1966 and 1982 eight phases of development on the two sites were completed to designs by Arup Associates. The practice worked with IBM at every stage of the design process, beginning with the development of the detailed brief for buildings. IBM praised “the tenacity and ingenuity” of the practice, “in particular the tremendous teamwork between architects and engineers... and ourselves, the client”. The site at Havant was developed as IBM’s manufacturing base to a masterplan by Arup Associates, the practice designing a succession of buildings there. The computer centre and assembly plant, with a total area of 97,500 sq.m.,
were completed in 1974, along with a distribution centre. These are very large single storey steelframed buildings, clad in white concrete pre-cast panels, subdivided into fire compartments by service cores running at right angles to the main spine and the main floor level raised to allow for a services undercroft. At North Harbour, Cosham, on land largely reclaimed from the sea, IBM developed its UK headquarters. A first phase of development saw a four storey concrete framed office building constructed on the eastern edge of the site. In a later phase, a spectacular headquarters building was completed, with 34,000 sq.m. of office space in a series of four stepped office pavilions, linked by a two-level steel and glass barrel-vaulted arcade, 3.6m wide, which incorporated shops, an exhibition space and auditorium, with views out to a generously planted landscape. A new entrance pavilion became the central reception area for the entire site, with escalators up to the main circulation level. Completed in 1982, the building remains one of the most impressive headquarters buildings of its period.
Masterplan of IBM Havant showing the systems assembly buildings and offices and computer centre. The final phase is not shown.
071
The Assembly Building at IBM Havant, a single storey building of heroic scale raised on a berm above the existing site to allow for a services undercroft.
072
IBM Havant Assembly Building and offices. The faรงades comprised a kit of parts of large light coloured horizontal precast panels and bands of glazing fitted between steel columns.
A glazed central spine to the assembly plant distribution centre and offices contains both the main entrance and shared amenities such as a restaurant around a landscaped courtyard.
073
Cut-away drawing showing an office pavilion and a glazed street in phase four.
The masterplan of the IBM development is comprised of four phases, the first two, a cruciform block to the east, was a four storey office building, the third a computer centre to the far west and the fourth a series of four terraced office buildings all of which were linked by a glazed street.
074
North Harbour, Cosham: The offices of the fourth phase consisted of a series of planted, terraced pavilions with views towards an artificial lake.
A view from a reception area in the first two phases of the office building in North Harbour Cosham.
Section though the edge of an office pavilion showing in-situ floor and roof structure with columns at 7.2 metre centres and shallow V-beams in both directions.
075
GPO Frederika Street Caledonia House General Post Office London, England 1973 Ampleforth College Ampleforth, England 1973
1973
Cathedral Close Roman Bath Excavations Exhibition Building Exeter City Council Exeter, England 1973
Music School University of East Anglia Norwich, England 1973
076
Staverton Road Residential Buildings University of Oxford Oxford, England
Lion Yard, Cambridge Central Library City of Cambridge Cambridge, England
1974
1975
1974 1975
Heavy Plate Shop, HM Dockyard Department of the Environment Portsmouth, England 1975
Awards 1975 Financial Times Awards Commendation Industrial Architecture Category
077
Millbank Base Workshop Millbank Technical Services Ltd Iran 1975 Wychfield House Trinity Hall University of Cambridge Cambridge, England 1975
1976
Kensington Central Works Depot & Housing Royal Borough of Kensington & Chelsea London, England 1976
Theatre Royal Restoration Scottish Opera Glasgow, Scotland 1975
078
Awards 1976 Department of the Environment Good Design in Housing Award Commendation – Public Sector Category
Lion Yard, Cambridge Street Kiosks Admass Ltd Cambridge, England 1976
House for P. Hinde Esq Iver, Buckinghamshire, England 1976
British Sugar Corporation Offices Peterborough, England 1976
Truman Headquarters Brick Lane Truman Ltd London, England
Awards
1976
1977 Office of the Year Award
1981 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Commendation
1977 Financial Times Awards Commendation 1976 Business and Industries Award Premier Award for the Environment
079
1976
080
Sir Thomas White Building St John`s College University of Oxford
Oxford England
081
082
Awards 1981 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Commendation 1976 Concrete Society Awards Commendation
The “structural grid” of reinforced concrete which was a defining feature of Arup Associates’ earlier residential projects for Oxford and Cambridge colleges found its most spectacular expression in this development for St John’s, Oxford’s wealthiest college. Plans to build new student housing on the northern edge of the college site dated back to the mid-1960s – the aim was to allow St John’s to offer all undergraduates three years of living in college. From a distinguished shortlist of four practices, Arup Associates was appointed in 1967 to design the project. The traditional Oxbridge quadrangle was rejected in favour of a linear plan for the new development, while retaining the traditional staircase access to rooms. Arup Associates ‘ambitious scheme, which included lecture rooms, a library, swimming pool and new senior common room on a site extending across Museum Road, was subsequently abandoned in 1970, in the face of budget cuts, in favour of a complete redesign, which provided residential accommodation for 145 students on a significantly reduced site.
The Sir Thomas White Building, named in honour of the college’s founder, is an L-shaped development with an external elevation to Museum Road, where the bush-hammered concrete frame elegantly bestrides an ancient stone wall. Its component parts are a series of “building blocks” consisting of a staircase/bathroom tower (clad in limestone) and an open framework containing four rooms on each floor. Timber window screens, rather Japanese in feel, provide privacy when required. At ground floor level, a colonnade, a device very much within the Oxford collegiate tradition, links the towers, with student common rooms between the stair entrances. The reduction in scale of the scheme notwithstanding, there was more than adequate funding for excellent detailing and the use of high quality materials, natural stone, timber and lead for roof coverings. This is certainly one of the outstanding university buildings of the expansive Sixties.
The Sir Thomas White Building at St. John’s College sits on an open ground floor colonnade, a modern equivalent of the cloistered quadrangles which are a feature of the historic Oxford colleges.
083
The building is a classic example of Arup Associates’ use of a structural grid of precast concrete.
The plan of the Sir Thomas White Building revolves around the traditional Oxford staircase.
The building extends in a linear form from the heart of the college.
084
Study-bedrooms featured comfortable built-in seating. En suite bathrooms were not specified, but shared and accessed off common stair landings.
above and below: Sliding timber window screens provide shading and privacy.
085
1977
086
Bush Lane House Trafalgar House Development Ltd (Phase 1) Greycoat PLC (Phase 2)
City of London England
087
088
Awards 1977 Structural Steel Design Award
In common with many other leading British practices of the post-war period, Arup Associates was slow to become involved with the world of speculative office design. At Bush Lane House in the City of London its client was developer Trafalgar House. The complexity of the brief drew fully on the multi-disciplinary skills of the practice. The site, adjacent to Cannon Street station, stood over the proposed route of the proposed Fleet Line (which eventually became the Jubilee Line Extension and ran south of the Thames). To provide for the future construction of the Underground tunnel, foundations were concentrated into four pairs of circular columns supporting an external stainless steel frame which sidestepped the proposed tube line and left the internal office spaces free of structural divisions. The lattice frame consists of a diagonal grid of
hollow steel tubes. This structural solution posed problems in terms of fire regulations – which ruled out exposed structural steel frames. As a response, the tubes were designed to be water filled so as to be fire resistant – a strategy developed further for Rogers & Piano’s Pompidou Centre in Paris by Arup engineers Ted Happold and Peter Rice. The completed building contained eight storeys of office accommodation, each of around 435 sq.m., elevated two storeys above the street. In 1997 Arup Associates was commissioned to infill this space with additional office, retail and restaurant accommodation – a new reception area was formed as a transparent glass box. Re-branded as 80 Cannon Street, the building, Arup Associates’ first City project, remains a distinctive expression of the fusion of architecture and engineering.
The structural steel frame left the office spaces free of internal divisions.
The tubular steel frame of Bush Lane House was filled with water that circulated during a fire, drawing heat away from the exposed steel structure; a response to stringent fire regulations.
089
Coloured plan showing the air and water distribution and ventilation plant in Bush Lane House.
Section through the building showing vertical distribution of services.
090
Structural steel connections, showing a water filled exo-skeleton-node.
Bush Lane House was a fantastic presence in the city when completed in 1976.
091
HM Dockyard Support Building Department of the Environment Portsmouth, England 1977 Vinyl Resin Plant British Industrial Plastics Ltd Newton Aycliffe, England 1977
1977
National Mineral & Metallurgical Laboratory Mathew Hall Ortech Ltd Jos, Nigeria 1977
092
HM Dockyard Royal Maritime Auxiliary Support Building HMG Department of the Environment Portsmouth, England 1977
1978
Pears Britten Music School Snape Maltings Foundation Aldeburgh, England 1978 Henry Wood Hall, Holy Trinity Church Southwark Rehearsal Hall Ltd London, England 1978
093
1978
094
Lloyd’s of London Corporation of Lloyd’s
Chatham England
095
096
Awards 1981 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award 1980 Business & Industry Award Commendation Civic Trust Award
Lloyd’s of London, the epicentre of the London insurance market, has been based in the City of London since its origins in a coffee house in the first years of the 18th century. The growth of its business led Lloyd’s to look for a site outside the City containing offices to house most of its administrative staff plus a data processing centre. Arup Associates initially advised Lloyd’s on the choice of a site – Gun Wharf, located on the river Medway at Chatham close to the then Royal Navy dockyard and with views across the river to Rochester Castle, was eventually chosen. The project brief was for a building of around 20,000 square metres. The site allowed for a low-rise building which would take advantage of the riverside setting and views, utilising the slope in the site down to the Medway. Offices, over a stepped section extending to a maximum four storeys, were to be almost entirely open-plan, but with appropriate provision for team working and possible future sub-division.
The spatial and architectural strategy, with brick cladding and pitched roofs reflecting a move from hardline modernism to a more contextual approach, was far from arbitary. It was closely linked to a structural diagram based on a 7.2 x 7.2m precast concrete pyramidal ceiling resting on four columns to form a bay, with the interstices between the pyramids carrying services – a classic Arup Associates integrated architecture and engineering solution with precedents extending back to the Birmingham metallurgy building but with obvious relevance to office design. The bay defined the territory of a working group. Two internal courtyards provide natural light and ventilation (via opening windows) for office spaces, with overhanging eaves offering shading from the sun. Only the computer suite was fully air-conditioned. Lloyd’s vacated the Gun Wharf building in 2007 and it is now the headquarters of Medway Council, adapting well to its new civic role.
The LIoyd’s building at Chatham was designed to take advantage of its site on the river Medway close to the historic dockyard.
097
Sketch elevation from the river showing descending terraces of roofs and walls.
The building is planned around internal courtyards, which provide day light to the offices.
098
The aesthetic of the building was highly contextual, making reference to the adjacent industrial building, and drawing on the work of Frank Lloyd Wright.
099
1978
100
Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) HQ
Bedminster Downs England
101
102
Awards 1980 Civic Trust Award Financial Times Awards Industrial Architecture Category Commendation Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Regional Award South West 1979 Business & Industry Award
The south-west regional headquarters for the Central Electricity Generating Board, located on the outskirts of Bristol, was hailed as a landmark in sustainable low-energy design when new. The project has much in common with the contemporary projects for Lloyd’s at Chatham and Wiggins Teape in Basingstoke, using structural organisation, rather than moveable partitions, to define working spaces suitable for team working, distinct from both the compartmented offices of the past and the anonymous open spaces typical of North American practice. The designs capitalised on the sloping site, with its views to the Clifton Gorge (and that engineering icon, Brunel’s suspension bridge). The offices are housed in four pavilions, each arranged around a central courtyard, linked by a “street” which is the circulation hub of the complex and equally a social space, with coffee points set along it. Office spaces enjoy natural light from external windows and clerestories formed within open roof voids – timber roof trusses are exposed, another move at odds with more traditional offices featuring suspended ceilings. Overhanging eaves and pitched slate roofs, as in the Lloyd’s building, contribute to an aesthetic which the critic Michael Brawne called “spiritedly Wrightian”, domestic rather than corporate in feel.
These devices are, however, part of a low-energy programme which was fundamental to the client brief. The building is heavily insulated. Heavy concrete floors are also ducts for air and can be pre-cooled at night to reduce daytime ventilation demands in summer, with a carefully integrated perimeter supply system. Areas such as the computer suite, which need extensive mechanical ventilation, are equipped with heat reclaim systems. Staff amenities included a swimming pool, warmed by waste heat. With the abolition of the CEGB, the building was successfully adapted for multioccupation.
The CEGB offices at Bedminster Down, Bristol, are planned around open landscaped courtyards.
103
Plan, showing the arrangement of offices in pavilions around landscaped courtyards.
Sections showing the integration of structure and services with floor voids acting as air ducts.
104
The building is immaculately detailed – handrails are integrated with wall surfaces.
The staff swimming pool was warmed by waste heat.
The appearance of the CEGB offices was described as “spiritedly Wrightian”.
105
Tadcaster Brewery Samuel Smith Old Brewery Tadcaster, England 1979
Lion Yard, Magistrates Court City of Cambridge Cambridge, England 1979
1979
Ecumenical Church Sutton, England 1979
Apartment Block Secon Egyptian Construction Co Cairo, Egypt 1979
106
Trust House Forte PLC Wrotham, England 1980 Trebor Sharps Ltd Factory Colchester, England 1980
Awards 1983 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award for Architecture 1982 Business & Industry Award
1980 1981
Bab Al Shiekh, Housing & Commercial, Iraq Amanat Al Asima Baghdad, Iraq 1981
107
1981
108
Gateway 1 and 2 Wiggins Teape (UK) PLC
Basingstoke England
109
110
Awards 1979 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Southern Region 1978 Business & Industry Award Commendation Civic Trust Award Commendation
By the 1970s Wiggins Teape, a paper manufacturing business established in the 18th century, had become an international concern. Arup Associates was commissioned in 1973 to design its new headquarters building in Basingstoke, whence the company relocated from the City of London. The new building was to house up to 1000 staff. Overlapping with – and with the same basic modular design strategy of – the office projects for Lloyd’s at Chatham and CEGB in Bristol, Gateway 1, as it became, used structure (on a 7.5m grid) to create a series of human scale spaces within highly flexible interiors accommodating both open-plan and cellular offices. Services were located in the interstices between the squares of the grid. The site sloped markedly, with open views to the south, and the designs responded to its contours, with offices in layers stepping down the slope and descending in scale from five storeys to two. Terraced gardens were provided at each level, with a sunken courtyard garden at the lowest level. In contrast to the Chatham and Bristol schemes, the architectural expression of Gateway 1 (completed in 1976) was rigorously modernist, almost Miesian in its purity. Gateway 2, also commissioned by Wiggins
Teape, was constructed on an adjacent site in 1981– 82, Wiggins Teape relocating its offices to the new building and selling Gateway 1, which had become too large for its needs, at a considerable profit. (It was rebranded as Mountbatten House.) With an eye to the future, the client specified a building, delivered to a fast-track schedule, using a management contract, and with a budget considerably less than that for Gateway 1, which could be potentially lettable. The most novel feature of the building was a central atrium, constructed using slender steel members, which prefigured that at 1 Finsbury Square in the City of London. The atrium functioned as a social space, complete with badminton court. It was equally significant as a major element, using the stack effect via opening roof vents, in the natural ventilation strategy, daringly adopted as an alternative to conventional air-conditioning. Wiggins Teape’s demise as an independent company led to the sale of Gateway 2, which was retro-fitted with air-conditioning using chilled beams and underfloor ventilation troughs, a move at odds with the original design strategy but one which the building was easily able to accommodate.
Gateway at Basingstoke occupied a sloping site. The project capitalised on this to provide a series of terraced gardens cascading down the slope.
111
Section through office in Gateway 1 showing the integration of structure and services to create a generous, human scaled environment.
The building was designed as a kit of parts for rapid site assembly.
112
The plan and section of Gateway 1.
Courtyard and terraced gardens provide amenities for the Gateway 1 staff.
113
The spectacular naturally ventilated atrium at Gateway 2.
114
Section through Gateway 2 showing the naturally ventilated central atrium, the first of its kind in Britain.
The services strategy used the stack effect to ventilate the atrium, with open roof vents to extract stale air.
115
Royal Liver Building Royal Liver Society Liverpool, England 1981
Bedford School, Great Hall Harpur Trust Bedford, England 1981
Kingston Power Station High Point Technical Services London, England 1981
116
Croydon Office Development Rosehaugh Greycoat Estates PLC London, England 1981
1982
GOSI Offices General Organisation for Social Insurance Damman, Saudi Arabia
Hilliat al Hammad, Dallah Car Parks Dallah Establishment Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 1982
1981
117
Mortlake High Street Inner City Commercial Premises Association Ltd London, England 1982
Digital Equipment Corporation Offices Reading, England 1982
Zimbabwe Veterinary College Harare, Zimbabwe 1982
118
Docklands Development Corporation Site Study London, England 1982 Awards
District Council Offices, Hadleigh, Suffolk Babergh District Council Hadleigh, England
1984 Civic Trust Award Commendation 1987 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Eastern Region
1982
1983
Zimbabwe Rhodesia House Conference Centre, The Strand Zimbabwe High Commission London, England
Bedford School Library Harpur Trust Bedford, England 1983
1982
119
Design without Compromise
02
120
Design without compromise – this is fundamental to the philosophy which drives Arup Associates and it is the natural outcome of a design process in which the first question asked is: “who are we building for?”. Experience proves that successful buildings are those which work well for their users, designed to a brief which is the result of a creative dialogue between architect and client. Arup Associates has been fortunate to work with clients who want to back innovative approaches to design and are prepared to work towards achieving results which serve the users of a building. The practice’s reputation for delivering creative solutions to the practical issues which clients bring to it is rooted in the dialogue – it can be a spirited debate – conducted within the office between architects, engineers and other professionals.
Arup Associates Six Themes
The pan-disciplinary nature of Arup Associates is fundamental to its ability to address the complex issues which face the world of construction and development today. Dialogue and debate generate the solution – the common idea is what counts. It follows that Arup Associates has no “signature style” – every building is a specific response to a specific set of needs. So Arup Associates’ buildings embody a rejection of the iconic tendency, the application of a style as a priority. The practice’s priority is designing without the compromises that approach implies, with an agenda that is about enabling clients to achieve the results they look for in their buildings.
121
Residences Worcester College Oxford Oxford, England 1983
BBC Competition Langham Place British Broadcasting Corporation London, England 1983
Laboratories Eton College Windsor, England 1983
122
Saudi Consolidated Electricity Offices Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 1983
Grand Theatre Redevelopment City of Swansea Swansea, Wales 1983
Hong Kong and Shanghai Bank Bishopsgate Gatechurch Property Management Ltd London, England 1983 West India Docks, Shed 19 London Docklands Development Corporation London, England 1983
123
Docklands Light Railway Tower (Gateway) Docklands Development Corporation London, England Tower Hill Station London Transport Executive London, England
1983
1983
BBC Edinburgh British Broadcasting Corporation Edinburgh, Scotland 1983
Milton Keynes Church Chesterton PLC Buckinghamshire, England 1983
124
Notting Hill Gate Station London Transport Executive London, England 1983
Manor Farm, Harmondsworth Rockfort Land Ltd Middlesex, England 1983 Embankment Station London Transport Executive London, England 1983
125
1983
126
Briarcliff House (Leslie & Godwin Group) ITC Pension Trust Ltd
Farnborough England
127
128
Awards 1986 Civic Trust Award 1985 Office of the Year Award
Built as offices for insurance brokers Leslie & Godwin, Briarcliff House was a striking feature of the otherwise mundane commercial centre of Farnborough. Arup Associates was first commissioned by Leslie & Godwin to design a building on the site (on the edge of the town centre, with busy roads on three sides) in 1978 but the scheme was subsequently developed, to a revised brief, by a pension fund in 1980–83 and let to Leslie & Godwin (now part of Aon PLC). The amended brief provided for a more typical speculative office building, with office spaces no more than 18m deep suitable for future sub-division as either open-plan or cellular offices. At ground level, the designs had to provide for some retail and parking space as well as the incorporation of a public route leading into the adjacent 1970s Kingsmead shopping centre. Working within this brief, the aim was to “contribute an element of order and visual interest to the undisciplined and rather drab character of the area”. The exposed nature of the site, surrounded by roads and with aircraft noise a further issue, demanded that the office spaces be insulated from
noise and solar gain – full air-conditioning was required, with a sealed exterior. An outer skin of façeted bronze tinted planar glazing on the southern façade gives the building its distinctive appearance. Behind is a 1m wide void through which air supply ducts are channelled and through which outside air is drawn, preheating it on cool and sunny days. Air handling at roof level serves floor-mounted air diffusers, providing an innovative stratified environment. An inner skin of glazed and solid panels can be adapted to suit various office layouts behind. The principal structure of the building is in situ concrete, with post-tensioned ribs clear-spanning 14.4m between perimeter ring beams, the exposed mass contributing to the comfort and low energy consumption of the building. The U-shaped plan of the 9500 sq.m. building provided for the creation of an enclosed garden at first floor level, a variation on the planted courts and terraces which have been a constant feature of Arup Associates’ office projects. The garden is overlooked by the staff restaurant and bar, constructed against the blank wall of the Kingsmead Centre.
The staff restaurant at Briarcliff House overlooks a landscaped first floor garden court.
129
Detailed section showing double skin ventilated faรงade buffering the exterior against noise and pollution and providing seasonal solar control and solar energy preheating to the air supply in winter.
Section through Briarcliff House.
130
Internal courtyard garden.
Office interior showing exposed concrete structure.
A canopy below the double skin faรงade shelters the main entrance to the building.
131
Diplomatic Quarter Police Headquarters Saudi Arabia Ministry of Foreign Affairs Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 1983 Docklands Development Corp Office Building Docklands Development Corp London, England 1983
Bayswater Station London Transport Executive London, England 1983
Aldermanbury Development EC2 Chartered Insurance Institute City of London, England 1983
132
Worshipful Company of Skinners Dowgate Hill Worshipful Company of Skinners London, England 1983 Fountain Business Villages Guildford Properties Ltd Wokingham, England 1983
1984
Church House, Deans Yard, Westminster Church House Corporation London, England 1984 Skippetts House Estate, Hampshire Gould Inc. Basingstoke, England 1984
133
1984
134
1 Finsbury Avenue Greycoat Estates PLC
City of London England
135
136
Awards 1987 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award for Architecture London Region 1985 Financial Times Awards Architecture at Work Category Structural Steel Design Award
North / South section through 1 Finsbury Avenue showing the central atrium.
The office building at 1 Finsbury Avenue, constructed in 1982–84 and designed by Arup Associates, can be seen as a landmark in the development of office design in Britain. The site was adjacent to Broad Street station – before boundary changes, it was outside the City and within the borough of Hackney. The brief from developer Rosehaugh Greycoat was for a fast-track project – the building was completed in just over a year – providing deep-plan office spaces aimed at the financial services sector. The project was far removed from the bespoke office schemes – Lloyd’s, Wiggins Teape, CEGB – for which the practice had won acclaim. To meet the client brief the Arup team abandoned concrete construction and used a steel frame, with steel decking as a base for precast concrete floors – team members visited the USA to study North American practice. The 30,000 sq.m. building was planned around a full-height glazed atrium, another highly innovative feature for early Eighties Britain. External shading and planting were a prominent feature of the elegantly detailed, bronze-clad elevations, with upper floors set back. 1 Finsbury Avenue remains one of the most admired post-war buildings in the City. The Architectural Review commented that the project “proved that spec offices can make a sensitive contribution to a civic environment and that even a huge office building can have a richness and delicate scale suggestive of the human beings who work within”.
Arup Associates was subsequently commissioned to design 2 and 3 Finsbury Avenue (1986–88). All these buildings are now part of Broadgate. The practice returned again to 1 Finsbury Avenue to design a reworking of the interior (1996–97) which saw the central atrium floored over at third floor level to provide additional dealing floor accommodation.
Plan showing the original context of 1 Finsbury Avenue.
137
138
opposite and above: The dramatic atrium at 1 Finsbury avenue before flooring over in 1996 –1997.
139
140
Staircase linking trading floors inserted in the 1990s.
opposite, above: Trading floor after the atrium was in-filled in the 1990s.
Section through the atrium showing the new trading floor.
141
1984
142
International Garden Festival Hall Merseyside Development Corporation
Liverpool England
143
The interior of the Festival Hall looks back to the great iron and glass structures of the 19th century, but using modern lightweight materials.
144
Awards 1987 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Commendation 1985 Civic Trust Award 1984 British Constructional Steelwork Association BCSA Structural Steel Design Award
In 1982, Arup Associates won a competition to design the Festival Hall for the International Garden Festival planned for 1984 and seen as a component in the regeneration of Liverpool’s docklands. The site, close to the river Mersey and the former Herculaneum Dock, had been used as a rubbish dump for two decades and was heavily polluted. The brief for the Festival Hall was for a building forming the focus of the 1984 Festival but thereafter to be converted into a sports complex with a leisure pool, large sports hall seating up to 3000 spectators, and smaller spaces housing squash courts and other facilities. The two functions were not easily compatible and the task of the architects was made more difficult by political controversy surrounding the Festival – part of the regeneration campaign for Merseyside launched by then Environment Secretary Michael Heseltine. Arup Associates’ response to this demanding brief was to design a “loose fit” structure, capable of containing a wide range of activities and
potentially adaptable should the future use of the building change. It was also vital that the building, constructed to a very tight schedule (just over a year), should have a strong, even celebratory identity which reflected its regenerative function. Its form was that of a dome, cut in two, with the two halves connected by a vaulted hall, the internal 7500 sq.m. space being entirely column free. There were echoes, not coincidental, of historic structures such as the Crystal Palace and the Palm House at Kew Gardens. The building’s lightweight, semi-transparent appearance was intended to make it a quiet backdrop to the exhibits surrounding it. The domes were clad in profiled aluminium sheet, the central hall in polycarbonate sheet, carried on semi-circular steel trusses, providing controlled daylight and treated to combat glare. After a period of use as an amusement park, the Festival Hall was finally demolished in 2006, ambitious plans for the development of the site as a continuing public amenity having faded.
The Festival Hall was the centrepiece of the garden festival site on the banks of the Mersey.
145
Image of the rapid construction of the steelwork.
Plan showing the building converted to use as sports venue – despite its potential for re-use, it was demolished in 2006.
146
Commemorative Stamp for the Garden Festival.
Competition section through the building showing the proposed festival configuration and the subsequent conversion to a sports centre.
147
1985
148
Diplomatic Quarter Sports Club Bureau of Foreign Affairs Saudi Arabia
Riyadh Saudi Arabia
149
150
The Diplomatic Quarter of Riyadh is located some 7km outside the centre of the Saudi capital, a 650 hectare city in its own right, providing a secure location for up to 80 foreign embassies. The masterplan approved by the Riyadh Development Agency provided for a low-rise, intensively landscaped quarter, literally an oasis in the rocky desert. Arup Associates was commissioned in 1981 to design a very large (94,000 sq.m.) sports and recreational club to serve the entire development. In tune with the client brief, the complex is clad in local stone, its architecture hinting subtly at local vernacular traditions. These traditions were harnessed by the architects and engineers to create an scheme of easy comfort, environment and sense of place. Strung along a pedestrian route, with parking and access roads around its perimeter, the development was conceived as a series of separate pavilions housing swimming pools, squash courts, a multi-purpose sports hall, cafeteria, and club house, together with outdoor courts and playing
areas. The groups of buildings are linked by walled enclosures screening the open courts – one driver of this strategy was the need, in line with Saudi law, to segregate male and female users of the site. The buildings were designed as a family of concreteframed structures utilising a generic construction system comprising pre-cast roof beams supported by primary beams and columns and flanked by solid stone walls. The large sports hall and indoor pool are impressive spaces and have a clear span of 24m. One of the key objectives in the scheme was to minimise energy use whilst creating a comfortable environment. The layout of the buildings, the use of deep reveals in carefully designed windows to reduce solar heat gain, enhanced insulation and the utilisation of thermal mass in the structure of the buildings much reduced the cooling load.
Plan of the Diplomatic Quarter Sports Club, a very large complex serving embassies in the Saudi Arabian Capital of Riyadh.
151
The Diplomatic Quarter Sports Club is designed with the severe climate in mind – shaded walkways provide relief from the sun and heavy masonry both internally and externally provides thermal mass, reducing energy required for cooling.
152
The Swimming Pool is an impressive space contained under a clear span roof.
153
Solent Business Park Arlington Securities PLC Hampshire, England 1985 Rolm Europe Rolm Europe Ltd Wootton Bassett, England 1985
1985
Trafalgar House, Cannon Street Trafalgar House Developments Ltd London, England 1985
Centre for British Teachers Centre for British Teachers Ltd Malaysia 1985
154
Bedford School, Junior School Harpur Trust Bedford, England Howden Management & Data Alexander Howden Group Ltd London, England
1985
1985
Springalls Wharf RTM Company London, England 1985
155
1986
156
Forbes Mellon Library Clare College University of Cambridge
Cambridge England
157
158
Clare College’s Fellows Library was described in 1742 as “the most elegant of any in the University”, by the 20th century it had become a repository for the college’s collection of rare books and manuscripts. Library provision for students was very poor, worse than that in any other Cambridge College, with the Forbes Library (named after former Fellow Mansfield Forbes, who left his own personal library to Clare in 1935) shoehorned into a very inadequate space. An appeal for funds for a new library was launched in 1983 and Arup Associates selected as architect. The brief provided not only for an undergraduate library accommodating up to 30,000 books but also for a recital room and music practice rooms – the college had established an outstanding mixed choir which remains one of the most accomplished in Cambridge. The site was controversial – the library was to be located at the centre of the Memorial Court, completed in 1935 to designs by Giles Gilbert Scott, who also designed the nearby University Library.
Building in the court would block a view through the court to the great tower of the University Library – however, there was no other obvious site for the new library within the densely occupied college complex and objections from the Thirties Society were of no avail. With one elevation designed in a Lutyensesque manner, in tune with Giles Scott’s architecture, and another, containing the main entrance, clearly inspired by Brunelleschi’s Pazzi Chapel, with a colonnade on slender piers, the building seeks to address sensitively the diverse historical context of the site. The interior makes very efficient use of what could have been an awkward plan, with a central rotunda serving the galleried library and providing access to music rooms on two levels in the front range. This is one of the most agreeable of the more recent Cambridge libraries, very much designed with users in mind.
The Forbes Mellon Library provides a study facility for Clare College, Cambridge.
A glazed Octagon separates the library from the music practice room forming part of the scheme.
The context of the library is the memorial court designed by Giles Gilbert Scott.
159
Royal Academy of Arts, Burlington House, Picadilly Royal Academy of Arts London, England 1986
Riverside Site, Chiswick, Lephawk Lephawk Ltd London, England 1986
1986 1987
Lincoln Castle Property Services Agency Lincoln, England 1987
160
Paternoster Square Masterplan St Pauls Stanhope PLC City of London, England 1987
1988
Keang Nam Enterprises Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 1988
Milton Bradley, Stockley Park Milton Bradley London, England 1988
161
1988
162
Broadgate Development Liverpool Street British Land Company PLC
City of London England
163
The office surroundings of Broadgate are fitted with granite sunscreens hung from the faรงades.
164
Awards 1992 RTPI Awards Award for Planning Achievement 1991 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Award for Urban Renewal Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award President’s Choice Building of the Year 1989 Civic Trust Award Special Award European Convention for Constructional Steelwork ECCS Steetly Award 1988 British Construction Industry Award BCIA Construction News Achievement Award
Arup Associates’ 1 Finsbury Avenue led to a commission from developer Rosehaugh Stanhope to masterplan Broadgate, a major new office development (driven by the 1986 deregulation of financial services which attracted many foreign institutions to London) on the site of Broad Street station. The practice was also commissioned to design a series of office buildings there which were constructed in four phases in 1985–87. The Arup masterplan cleverly shifted the focus of the City northwards, into previously neglected territory. It also provided for generous public spaces around the buildings, the focus of the development being Broadgate Square with the Arena (now known as the Circle, housing shops and restaurants and a central space used as an ice rink in winter). Vehicular servicing was located at basement level. The buildings themselves were eight storeys high, planned around central atria, with perforated, non-structural granite sunscreens masking their glazed elevations, a concession, perhaps to the perceived need for a “City look”. As in the case of 1 Finsbury Avenue, the buildings were completed
to shell and core for tenant fit-out, and made extensive use of prefabricated components, for example, of cladding components and toilet pods, which speeded construction and reduced costs. The development was hugely successful in commercial terms, successfully accommodating a number of large dealing floors. Numbers 4 and 6 Broadgate were demolished in 2012 for a new office development and a strategy for the progressive renewal of the estate is being developed. As part of this, Arup Associates has redesigned the Circle, with reconfigured retail and restaurant space and with the central ice rink /performance space lowered, making it a more effective public space.
Arup Associates’ masterplan for Broadgate focuses on the provision of generous public spaces, with the Arena, now the Circle, at the centre of the development.
165
Broadgate created a public realm of high quality, using excellent methods, carefully detailed. Public art was a feature of the development from the beginning.
166
The Arena, now the Circle, was designed to host a series of events around the year, including iceskating in the winter months.
167
“The Inhabited Cliff-Face” – early concept sketch.
Early sketch perspectives demonstrate greatly improved visual connectivity across the Circle.
The 5 key interventions shown above have been developed to greatly improve the civic and cultural experience at the heart of the Broadgate Estate.
168
Image of Broadgate Circle reconfigured. Showing the lowered arena and new retail.
169
Emerald Street Development, Camden Harpur Trust Camden, London, England 1989
1989
Broughton Business Park Broughton Business Park Milton Keynes, England 1989
Redhill Aerodrome British and Commonwealth Properties Redhill, England 1989
170
London Bridge Olympia & York (UK) Ltd London, England 1989
Fradley Airfield Fradley Airfield Lichfield, England 1989
British Airways Competition British Airways PLC London, England 1989
171
Scotstoun House Proposal, South Queensferry Ove Arup & Partners, Scotland Edinburgh, Scotland 1989
Expo 92 Seville Competition Expo 92 Seville, Spain 1989 Paradise Project London Underground Ltd London, England 1989
172
Inmarsat Place Euston Station Inmarsat Ltd London, England 1990
123 Buckingham Palace Road Greycoat London Estates Ltd London, England 1990
Awards 1992 Structural Steel Design Awards Commendation
1990
Eccleston Bridge, Victoria Buckingham Palace Road Greycoat Estates PLC London, England 1990
173
Setting New Standards
03
174
From the beginning, Arup Associates’ work has broken boundaries, set new standards and redefined – in some cases, reinvented – entire building types. The key to this process of reinvention is the practice’s exploration, backed by research, into the ways that architecture and engineering, building form, structure and services interact. This process of exploration is apparent in an early work by Arup Associates such as the Mining and Metallurgy Building at Birmingham, with its virtuoso use of the tartan grid to carry the intensive servicing requirements of a laboratory block. At Stockley Park the practice was responsible for the masterplan and many of the buildings of a pioneering out of town business park, developed on the basis of intensive research into the practical needs of future users. A succession of bespoke office buildings, including Gateway 1 and CEGB Bristol, re-imagined
Arup Associates Six Themes
what the ideal office environment might be, looking at the everyday experience of the building’s users. At Gateway 2, the potential for reinventing the speculative office building as a naturally ventilated, naturally lit environment was explored – the experience gained fed into 1 Finsbury Avenue, a building which set a new model for City office buildings and in turn informed the design of Broadgate. The process of innovation fuelled the design of Plantation Place and Ropemaker Place, with their landscaped terraces and low-energy servicing strategies. Environmental concerns have driven projects such as the FIFA Showcase in Qatar, demonstrating the possibility of creating comfortable conditions for players and spectators in an extreme climate, and the BSkyB complex, with the world’s first naturally ventilated television studios.
175
1990
176
Sussex Grandstand, Goodwood Goodwood Racecourse Ltd
Chichester England
177
178
Awards 1992 West Sussex County Council Building Category Best submission 1991 Royal Fine Art Commission Trust Building of the Year Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award 1981 Concrete Society Awards Building Structures Category
“A garden party with racing tacked on” was King Edward VII’s description of Goodwood. It was in this spirit that Arup Associates addressed the commision to prepare a masterplan for the future development of one of England’s most notable – and certainly most enjoyable – racecourses, spectacularly located on the South Downs. The masterplan provided for improved facilities for all race-goers, not just those enjoying its glamorous corporate hospitality. Arup Associates designed the new Sussex Grandstand in the context of the masterplan: it was completed in 1990. The project involved some significant changes to the layout of the course – including, controversially, moving the winning post. The stand incorporates catering facilities, hospitality suites, cloakrooms and administrative offices. The Sussex Stand, constructed in a year between August 1989 and July 1990, replaced an earlier structure dating from 1830. In total, it seats 3000 people but most of the seating is in the open – spectators at race meetings, in contrast to those at team sports, are very mobile and tend to dress for the weather. (The main meetings at Goodwood are in high summer.) Circulation is an important
consideration, with race-goers coming and going between races. It is the canopy covering the top level of seating, however, which gives the stand its character. It takes its cue from the tents and marquees which spring up at Goodwood at the time of meetings. The canopy is a masted structure, with a roof of polyester reinforced PVC cable-stressed from three masts – assembly and erection was completed in one week. The entire upper tier of the stand is of steel, with pre-cast concrete steppings. The demanding schedule of the project ruled out the use of pre-cast concrete for the main frame of the stand, which is constructed of two levels of in situ coffered slab. Its brick-clad base provides continuity with adjacent buildings on the course. The stand has a lightness of touch and sense of enjoyment in tune with the ethos of Goodwood.
The Sussex grandstand was designed to provide seating, open air and covered, for 3000 spectators. It was part of a major upgrade to the prestigious racing venue.
179
The most striking feature of the Sussex Grandstand are the masted roofs covering the upper levels of seating. The masts support a covering of polyester reinforced PVC, a new version of the traditional marquee.
180
181
Chesterfield House, EC3 British Land Company PLC London, England 1990 Moormuhle Hotel Topic Foods (UK) Ltd Hanover, Germany 1990
1990
Manchester Airport Alfred McAlpine PLC Manchester, England 1990 Villebon Business Park Shimuzu France SA Orly, Paris, France 1990
182
Buda Nova, Budapest Teleport Industries Budapest, Hungary 1990
Hamamuso Resort, MIO Tokyo Ltd Hokkaido, Japan 1990
Marsham Street HMG Department of the Environment London, England 1990
183
Dinan Departement Côtes-d’Armor Brittany, France 1990
Luton Business Park Luton, England 1990
1991
Acheres Paris Departement Yvelines Paris, France 1990
184
Legal & General Headquarters Legal & General Assurance Society Ltd Kingswood UK
Awards
1991
1990 Energy Efficiency with Electricity
1992 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Regional Award
Copthorne Hotel Newcastle, England 1991
Awards 1991 Civic Trust Award
Wentworth Golf Club & Tennis Pavilion Chelsfield (UK) PLC Virginia Water, England 1991
Neasden Service Control Centre London Underground Ltd London, England 1991
Awards 2000 British Construction Industry Award Special Award
XXth District Park, Hungary Triport Ltd Budapest, Hungary 1991
185
Innsbruck Stadium, Bergisel Municipality of Innsbruck Innsbruck, Austria 1991 Kodak Nottingham, England 1991
D端sseldorf Tower Competition D端sseldorf GmbH D端sseldorf, Germany 1991 Birmingham Star Museum Birmingham City Council Birmingham, England 1991
186
Inland Revenue Offices HM Revenue & Customs Nottingham, England
Financial Centre Milan Commune di Milano Milan, Italy 1991
1991
October Square, Moscow Tower Russian Ministry of Oil and Gas Moscow, Russia Eczacibasi Atrium Project, Turkey Eczacibasi Company Istanbul, Turkey
1991
1991
187
Cory Environmental, Refuse-to-Energy Plant, Belvedere Cory Environmental Ltd Bexley, England Berlin 2000 Olympic Bid Olympia 2000 Sportstattenbauten GmbH Berlin, Germany 1991
1992
Genshagen, Building Type D, Berlin Horsham Properties GmbH Berlin, Germany 1992
188
1992
Luton Airport St Katherine by the Tower Ltd Luton, England 1992
London Hospital Framework Plan Royal London Hospital and Community Service NHS Trust London, England
Great Common Farm (Planning Applications) Stanhope PLC Bourn, England 1992
1992
189
1992
190
Royal Life Peterborough Royal Life Holdings Ltd
Peterborough England
191
192
Awards 1992 Civic Trust Award
The 1987 brief from Royal Life for its new office building, located in the Peterborough Business Park, close to the A1 and River Nene and with views out to open countryside, provided for office space to accommodate up to 1000 staff relocated from a number of buildings in the area, plus a substantial computer suite. Excellent staff amenities, including sports facilities, were another element of the brief. The linear form of the building was generated by a response to the surrounding landscape. Three storeys of offices in rectangular blocks look out over landscaped gardens to a belt of trees on the northern perimeter of the site – the orientation of the office spaces removes the need for external shading or blinds to the 180m long, 12m high glazed screen wall, a spectacular device set forward of the office floors to form a striking object in the landscape.
The building is entered from the south side, where a lake and heavily landscaped car-park form its setting – the staff restaurant, coffee bar, sports hall, and other communal spaces are located in a curved southern block separated from the office areas by a top-lit internal street. Circulation between office spaces is provided along the edge of the street, which has a solid roof which protects the offices from the impact of direct sunlight. The contrast in form between the two main components of the building is reflected in its structural design. The office blocks were constructed on an in situ concrete frame. The southern block is a steel-framed structure with composite floors.
The building configuration provides a comfortable environment for the users, with the solid roof excluding solar gain.
Diagrams showing progression through the Royal Life building from the public car park to the natural landscape to the rear.
193
The linear form of the building is a response to its landscape setting.
Section of the building showing the internal street dividing the three storeys of offices from the communal spaces along the entrance front.
194
The Royal Life Building makes good use of its location on an elevated site. The staff restaurant spills out onto an external terrace with views over the lake.
195
Labovich Opera Tent, Hyde Park Neville Labovich London, England 1992
Frankfurt Schools City of Frankfurt Frankfurt, Germany 1992
1992
Project Flame British Gas Solihull, England 1992 KOC University KOC Foundation Istanbul, Turkey 1992
196
Bridewell Development London Haslemere Estates Ltd London, England 1992 Sun Life Bristol Parkway Sun Life Insurance Bristol, England 1992
1993
Lloyd’s Register Lloyd’s of London London, England 1992
Buxton Opera House Conversion & Restoration High Peak Borough Council Buxton, England 1993
197
Lyon, Champ Du Pont Communaute Urbaine de Lyon Lyon, France 1993
Government Offices Great George Street Property Holdings London, England 1993 Lloyds Cannon Marsh Lloyds Project Construction Company Ltd Bristol, England 1993
Awards 1995 Civic Trust Award 1994 British Institute of Facilities Office of the Year Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Regional Award Wessex Region 1993 Concrete Society Awards
198
Linden-S端d Hanover Design Competition DIBAG (Doblinger Industriebau Glasmanufaktur AG) Hanover, Germany 1993 National Bowls Centre Worthing Borough Council Worthing, England 1993
Istanbul FPWC Markets Istanbul Food Processors & Wholesalers Cooperative Istanbul, Turkey 1993 Shizuoka Mitsubishi / Chiba / Aomori Stadium, Japan Arup Japan Ltd / Mitsubishi Estate Co Ltd Shizuoka, Japan 1993
199
Gonville & Caius College Cambridge, England 1994
Cape Town Olympics 2004 SA Olympic Committee Cape Town, South Africa 1993
1994
The British Museum Competition London, England 1994
200
British Embassy Berlin, Germany 1994
Shanghai Stadium, China Superior Management Ltd Shanghai, China Brighton Library Competition Brighton & Hove City Council Brighton, England
1994
1994
201
Istanbul Cultural Center Seat Istanbul Foundation for Culture & Arts
1994
202
Istanbul Turkey
Arup Associates was appointed to design the new Cultural and Congress Center on the outskirts of Istanbul in 1993. The project was to include a 2500 seat concert hall, plus a chamber music hall and conference halls, but was subsequently cancelled. The seating which the practice designed for Istanbul is an excellent example of its expertise in product design and experience at designing furnishings – of which the seating at Snape Maltings was an early instance.
The prototype seat remains an admirable example of Arup Associates’ ability to use up to date technology – in this case, advanced metal casting techniques – to produce something of timeless elegance. The seat incorporates numbering – often an awkward add-on. The seat bottom and back are of durable stitched leather. Extra padding can be added to soften the acoustic of the space where the seating is installed. The seat provides a hint of the quality of the – regrettably unrealised – interiors.
203
Istanbul National, Cultural and Congress Center Istanbul Foundation for Culture & Arts Istanbul, Turkey 1994 Hong Kong Spectral Glass Sculptures in collaboration with James Carpenter MTRC Hong Kong 1994
50 Triton Square (1 Regent`s Place) British Land Company PLC London, England 1994
Agecrof Colliery Inner City Enterprises PLC Salford, England 1994
204
Awards 1998 Lighting Industry Federation National Lighting Design Award
BBC Wales Design Competition Trawsfynydd Power Station BBC Wales Trawsfynydd, Wales 1994
World Cargo Centre Heathrow Heathrow Airport Ltd London, England 1994
1995
Ellis Park Athletics Stadium, Johannesburg Johannesburg City Council Johannesburg, South Africa 1995
Awards 1998 South African Association of Consulting Engineers Award 1998 South African Institute of Architects Award 1996 Fulton Award for Civil Engineering, South Africa
205
1995
206
Imperial War Museum
London England
207
208
Awards 1991 Civic Trust Award 1990 British Tourist Authority Come to Britain Award Museum of the Year Award National Lighting Award Royal Fine Art Commission Trust Building of the Year 1989 Structural Steel Design Award
Housed since 1936 in what remains of the former Bethlem Royal Hospital in Lambeth, the Imperial War Museum has developed into one of London’s most dynamic museums. Arup Associates was appointed in 1983 to develop a brief for the future development of the building, increasing gallery space, improving visitor facilities and providing appropriate conditions for the conservation of the museum’s collections. The first phase of development (1986–89) provided a spectacular addition to the building in the form of a galleried central exhibition hall, with an overall glazed roof, filling what had been a central courtyard and creating a space where tanks, field guns and aircraft could be displayed. New galleries for the display of the museum’s outstanding art collection and a 170 seat cinema were also created in what was a striking transformation of what had become a stale institution.
In Phase 2 of the development programme, completed in 1994, 1600 sq.m. of new gallery space, including further gallery space for art works, was formed by infilling a lightwell in the south-eastern corner of the building. Phase 3 of the development project, completed in 2000, provided a further 5000 sq.m. of display space, including new education facilities and a conference room. Most significantly it included accommodation for the Holocaust Exhibition, the first display in the country devoted to the history of the World War II holocaust. Arup Associates’ work at the Imperial War Museum demonstrated the potential for transforming a historic museum building, pointing the way to equally transformational projects at other institutions.
Diagrams showing the phasing for the Imperial War Museum (1983–2000).
209
Cinema and art gallery spaces shown in this section were also created in this phase of work.
The centrepiece of the first phase of development of the Imperial War Museum was the new central exhibition hall, covered by a curved translucent roof.
210
One of the new galleries for war art which was part of Phase 2 work.
The Holocaust Exhibition was part of the third phase of work completed in 2000.
211
Texaco Embankment London Texas Oil Company London, England 1995 3 The Square - Stockley Park East Stockley Park Consortium Ltd London, England 1995
Awards 1998 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Regional Award
Goldsmiths, Bow Street Goldsmiths Co London, England 1995 Phoenix Project Tilbury Phoenix Ltd Paisley, Scotland 1995
212
Royal Victoria Dock Study London Docklands Development Corporation London, England Upper Heyford London & Metropolitan PLC Upper Heyford, England
1995
1995
University of Nottingham Nottingham, England 1996
Wiggins International Business Park, Kent Wiggins Group PLC Kent, England 1996
213
1996
214
The Gro Newtown Rural Wales and Control Techniques PLC
Newtown Wales
215
The south facing elevation of the building is equipped with a fixed blade sunscreen to control solar gain.
216
Awards 1999 Civic Trust Award 1998 National Eisteddfod of Wales Gold Medal for Architecture Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Regional Award
This project combines research and development spaces and headquarters offices for a successful electronics company on a greenfield site outside Newtown in Mid Wales. The 1.2ha site, adjacent to a golf course on the edge of the town, overlooks Gro Tump, with its prominent mound created as part of a long-lost medieval castle. This important historic feature provides a focus for the development, which capitalises on the contours of the site with a building cut into the ground on the west and rising above ground level on its eastern side. A grassed bank surrounds the perimeter of the development up to window cill level on the ground floor – to the east a retaining wall protects the building from possible flooding. The project integrates a number of activities under one roof, with the main reception area,
placed centrally on the southern elevation, dividing the building into two zones. Secure R&D facilities, including an exhibition space, are located to the west, offices and meeting rooms to the east, the two connected by a bridge at first floor level. A circular pavilion on the north side of the complex contains a 48 seat restaurant and kitchens – like the main building it is raised above flood level on a grassed bank and linked to the main building by an opensided corridor. Air conditioning was specified for the majority of the internal spaces, but the southern façade is protected from solar gain by a fixed blade sunscreen. Offices enjoy controlled natural light and fine views across the surrounding countryside. The unaffected elegance of this building is an appropriate response to a sensitive location.
Plan showing circular restaurant and access walkway.
North elevation showing glazed walkway to restaurant within landscaped grounds.
Section showing pitched roof with opening clerestory.
217
Leavesden Studios Watford, England
Glasgow Millennium Arena Glasgow City Council Glasgow, Scotland
1997
1996
1996 1997
Yorkshire County Cricket Club (YCCC) Wakefield, England 1997
G.C.H.Q Project Signal Bovis Construction Cheltenham, England 1997
218
University of Hertfordshire Sports Development Hatfield, England 1997
Greenwich Millennium Village English Partnerships London, England 1997
1998
Wankdorf Stadium Beyeler Ingenieure AG Bern, Switzerland 1998
Crystal Palace Masterplan London Borough of Bromley London, England 1998
219
1998
220
Stockley Park Stockley Park Consortium Ltd
London England
221
View of the early two storey buildings within a landscaped context of water and lavish planting.
222
Awards 1995 Landscape Institute Award Design Category 1991 International Art & Work Awards Art and Work Award Financial Times Awards Architecture at Work Award Royal Institution of Chartered Surveyors (RICS) 1989 Civic Trust Award Financial Times Awards Commendation Architecture at Work Category Industrial Agents Society Development of the Year 1987 Royal Town Planning Institute RTPI High Commendation United States Progressive Architecture Awards Innovation in Building & Construction Category
Just as Broadgate led the way in the provision of dealing floor spaces for the rapidly changing financial services sector, Stockley Park set the standard for out of town business parks, a new phenomenon in Britain. The principal progenitor of both projects was developer Stuart Lipton, who commissioned Arup Associates in 1983 to prepare a masterplan for Stockley Park. The 350 acre site – 250 acres of which was to be transformed into a golf course and public open space – was close to the M4 motorway and Heathrow airport but had been used for many years as a rubbish dump. Some 3.5 million cubic metres of polluted waste had to be removed before construction work could start in 1985. As at Broadgate, fast-track, construction techniques were employed – steel-framed, two and three storey blocks, typically with 18m deep floors flanking a central atrium, were completed to shell and core stage, ready to be fitted out in line with tenants’ requirements. Arup Associates completed eight of these buildings in 1985–87, all of two storeys, with hipped roofs and white cladding, giving the development an overall discipline lacking in other business parks of the period. Lavish planting, a feature of American business parks, was a key feature of the scheme and softened the impact of the large areas of parking. High-tech companies working in the fields of electronics and information technology formed the
majority of early tenants. Working within the Arup Associates masterplan, the developers subsequently commissioned a number of other practices to design buildings in the park. Arup Associates was responsible for two further buildings constructed in 1989-90, as well as for the Arena (1989), intended to be the social hub of the development and containing management offices, a sports club, restaurant and conference centre. The central circular court had a monumental quality recalling the Arena at Broadgate. The recession of the early 1990s brought a hiatus in development at Stockley but in 1996 construction began again, with The Square. The five blocks there designed by Arup Associates marked a break with the pattern set by the earlier buildings, not least in terms of their overall form, all were double skin with platonic forms enclosing diverse social and amenity spaces. They featured cruciform floorplates, around a central core, enclosed within a glazed outer rainscreen façade (fitted with blinds to baffle solar gain), creating a buffer zone of atrium space that provided for the option, at least, of natural ventilation – air conditioning was standard in earlier buildings. The glossier commercial aesthetic of later buildings at Stockley, with the use of natural stone and timber, reflected its emergence as an office park – planning restrictions still in force in the mid-Eighties had defined its use as primarily industrial.
The Stockley Park Masterplan as originally conceived. To the south is the main development accessed off the A408 Stockley Road with a landscape of water, ground forms and planting. To the north is Stockley Pines golf club. The arena is at the centre providing an amenity for both the business park and golf club.
223
Located between the golf course and the business park, and organised around a circular colonnaded courtyard, the arena building provides a social hub for the park and contains a mix of sports and social facilities, shops, restaurants and a swimming pool.
224
The earlier steel frame, two storey blocks with 18m deep floors and central atria.
This three storey building represents a more formal type with a tree lined avenue leading up to an entrance marked by a curved open screen, twin towers and a circular pond.
225
The five buildings designed as part of “The Square” in the 90s were platonic plan forms that comprised an outer rainscreen glazed frame enclosing orthogonal double glazed and insulated office space, with opening windows. The perimeter atria provided an amenity space for the occupiers and an environmental “buffer” to the office accommodation.
Internal view of 3 The Square showing the generous atria between the inner cladding and the outer glazed rainscreen.
226
The site plan showing the five blocks in “The Square�. The sixth block to the west adjacent to the lake (No.1 The Square) is an earlier building by Eric Parry.
A view of 2 The Square showing the inner timber cladding, opening windows and the naturally ventilated outer glazed rainscreen.
227
Bishop’s Stortford College Bishop`s Stortford College Governors Bishop`s Stortford, England 1998
Mary Immaculate College Limerick School Quinn Savage Smith Limerick, Ireland 1998
1998
Chelverton, Lisbon Chelverton Properties Ltd Lisbon, Portugal 1998 Queenstown Road, Battersea Harbour Land Ltd London, England 1998
228
Awards 2000 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Housing Design Award
Trading floor integrated ceiling 1 Finsbury Avenue Warburg Dillon Read City of London, England 1998
Gloucester Docks Crest Nicholson Properties Ltd Gloucester, England 1998
1999
East Manchester Regeneration Manchester City Council Manchester, England 1999
229
1999
230
Watling House Development British Land Company PLC
City of London England
231
The office floor plan prior to the omission of the atrium. The main corners of the building were also modified into “bookends” in the final scheme.
Location plan of Watling House within the Bow Lane conservation Area.
Model of the Watling Street-Bread Street corner of Watling House showing the vertical composition of window openings. With retail oriel windows on the ground floor, balconied windows on the second and third storeys, and topped by a lid of recessed continuous glazing on the sixth floor.
Detail of the curved horizontal louvres forming “bookends” over the entrance.
232
Arup Associates’ involvement with Watling House began in 1988 when the practice was commissioned to design a new office building for the site on Cannon Street, in the City of London, close to St Paul’s Cathedral and within the Bow Lane conservation area. The downturn in the property market of the early 1990s left the project unrealised but it was subsequently revived with British Land as client. A redesign omitted the central atrium originally planned – the scheme as built gained planning consent in 1997, with completion early in 1999. The challenge for the architect was to engage with a very varied townscape context – the contrast between the broad thoroughfare of Cannon Street, dominated by large office buildings, and the finer grain of Watling Street to the north, with a mix of smaller scale, largely 19th century buildings, was dramatic. The overall height of the new building was also strictly limited by the St Paul’s Heights strategy and the tight integration of concrete structure and services in plan and section created a floor to floor height of 3.45m. This unique achievement, possible only by the high degree of integration the
disciplines embrace, meant that a further floor could be accommodated within the building, securing the financial success of the project. In practical and commercial terms, the building, planned around a central core with most of the plant at basement level, made highly efficient use of a difficult site, thanks to imaginative engineering solutions. But its contribution to the street scene was carefully considered. The modest structural grid of 6m x 6m was driven by the tight storey height, but it was decided to adopt a façade grid of 4.5m, mediating between the extremes in scale of Cannon Street and Watling Street. The three street elevations of the building are composed of stone-clad reinforced concrete piers propping the edge of the floor slab with a 3m glass cladding zone. To the south and west, the façades are triple-glazed reducing the size of the perimeter air conditioning systems – the outer level of glazing was omitted on the northern elevation to Watling Street. The two corner elevations feature a stack of horizontal louvres shading the glazing and forming “bookends” to the modular elevational system.
View of Watling House from Canon Street showing the main entrance and the triple glazing oriel windows on the west (facing Bread Street) and south (facing Cannon Street) elevations.
233
Bristol Housing Study Crest Homes Bristol, England 1999
New College Durham, Phase 1 Howland`s Farm University of Durham Durham, England 1999
1999
4 The Square Stockley Park Stockley Park Consortium Ltd London, England 1999 6 The Square, Stockley Park Stockley Park Consortium Ltd London, England 1999
234
Unilever House, Leverhulme Theatre Unilever London, England
Newham - Stratford to Thameside Arc of Opportunity London Borough of Newham London, England
1999
1999
Atlantic Estates Camden London, England 1999
Spencer Dock, Dublin Dublin Corporation Dublin, Ireland 1999
235
1999
236
Hong Kong Station Mass Transport Railway Corporation (MTRC)
Hong Kong China
237
The check-in hall at the heart of the station enjoys an abundance of daylight and is the core of activity for the entire building.
238
The new Central Station project was generated by the decision to close Hong Kong’s Kai Tak airport, located perilously close to the city centre, and construct a new airport at Chek Lap Kok, a small island off the coast of Lantau Island. The new airport, with a terminal building designed by Foster + Partners, provided scope for future expansion – opened in 1998, it currently handles 56 million passengers annually and traffic is growing at a rate of 5% a year. However, it was sited some 35km from the city centre, so that new public transport connections were vital. An express rail link, with trains departing every ten minutes with a journey time of under half an hour, was planned. Huge new residential developments – effectively a new town – were also planned on Lantau Island, creating a need for new commuter services to the city. Hong Kong’s Mass Transit Railway (MTR), which had already created one of the most efficient urban rail systems in the world, was the client for the new central station acting as a terminus for the new services. The new station was sited on reclaimed land on the city’s harbour front, close to Hong Kong’s central business district. The aim was to create a station which would become part of the experience of flying, an appropriate complement to the new airport terminal building. (Check-in facilities for flights are provided, so that passengers can then proceed directly to gates on arrival at Chek Lap Kok.) The masterplan for the site required the provision of profitable commercial development associated with the station development.
With Arup, an long established presence in Hong Kong, acting as consultant engineers for the project, Arup Associates was commissioned late in 1992 (working with Rocco Design as concept designers) as architect for the station – in effect, two stations serving the airport and commuter trains, arranged on nine levels, four of them below ground. The central focus of the building is the main hall serving the airport express services, a street level space 106m long and a generous 23m high. To the north, it is enclosed by a great wall of glass, with views of the city. At the time of its construction, this was the largest independently supported glass wall in the world, completely frameless and supported on 18 bowstring trusses. Passengers access the trains, 10m below ground, using escalators and lifts. The Tung Chung commuter line has its concourse at basement level, an imposing space 180m long and with a subway link, a major engineering challenge in its own right, to the existing Hong Kong Station. One of the major achievements of the project, given the constraints of the site in one of the world’s most crowded cities, was the way in which natural light is funnelled into the depths of the building. Given the vertical character of Hong Kong and the fact that the station would be overlooked by some of the most valuable real estate in the world, the huge roof of the station is a major design feature, with some 4,400 sq.m. of titanium cladding. Constructed “top down”, Central Station was the product of a triumphant collaboration between architecture and engineering in the best Arup tradition.
Axonometric of the central station, showing the arrangement of the building on nine levels. Commuter trains use a concourse at basement level.
239
Section through the station showing express airport and commuter lines stacked one above the other.
The central station is located on reclaimed land close to Hong Kong’s Harbour front.
The glazed elevation to the main station concourse is a structural tour de force with frameless glazing supported on bow string trusses.
240
The airport express concourse.
Glass lifts provide an animated link between street level and the basements.
Freestanding glass ticket centres and supervisors’ kiosks provide visual punctuation throughout the building.
241
MSD Hoddesdon Merck Sharp & Dohme Hoddesdon, England 1999
Furniture Design London Business School London, England 1999
1999
Cambridge University Sports Centre EMBS University of Cambridge Cambridge, England 1999
242
Aberdeen Football Club Aberdeen F.C. Aberdeen, Scotland 1999
Cambridge Colonnade University of Cambridge Cambridge, England Earlsgate David Wilson Estates Ltd Swindon, England
1999
1999
243
1999
244
BP Baglan Bay (G8) Showcase BP International Ltd
Baglan Bay Wales
245
The BP solar showcase was designed to show the potential of photovoltaic technology. Here it is shown in its final location in South Wales.
246
Awards 1999 BP Chairman’s Award UK Solar Awards
Arup Associates’ expertise in sustainable design was reflected in the commission from BP to design a pavilion demonstrating the potential of photovoltaic technology – it was designed and constructed in just over six weeks to coincide with the G8 summit of world leaders held in Birmingham in 1998. The aim was to provide a showcase for BP’s developing work in the area of solar technology but working with BP the Showcase demonstrated broader thinking in sustainability and striking architectural form. The shape of the pavilion was driven by the south-facing solar wall, curved and angled to optimise the absorption of energy from the sun throughout the day and forming the roof of the building, shading the east and west vertical walls. The monocoque structure was a pre-manufactured diagrid of laminated timber. The Showcase recovered
heat from behind the photovoltaics using integrated fan systems, and stored the heat in a pebble store which was visible beneath a glass floor panel. The Showcase was used as a pavilion, to host a number of functions during the summit and afterwards for schools and education into energy and sustainability. It was integrated with the local electricity network to allow the export of power during the day and import of power at night. The Showcase generated twice as much energy as it used, making a positive contribution to the grid. After the end of the summit, the pavilion was dismantled and relocated to Baglan Bay Energy Park in south Wales, a low-energy business park, where it forms part of a visitor centre, realising the ambition for a ground-breaking reusable building. A model of the structure can be seen in the Science Museum.
The south-facing solar wall was designed to optimise the absorption of energy from the sun throughout the day.
247
The Showcase was constructed to a tight schedule for the 1998 G8 summit in Birmingham and designed to be easily disassembled for erection elsewhere after the summit.
The Showcase was subsequently re-erected on a site in South Wales.
248
Perspective showing the range of sustainable energy strategies incorporated in the Showcase.
The Showcase illuminated by its own off-grid power during the G8 summit conference.
249
Millennium Footbridge River Wear Sunderland, England City of Sunderland
Riverside Infants School Essex County Council Hullbridge, England 2000
1999
2000
Ponte Parodi Competition Commune Di Genova Genova, Italy 2000 Oslo Opera House Competition Norske Opera Company Oslo, Norway 2000
250
Torquay Harbour Footbridge Torquay Council Torquay, England SMU - Singapore Management University Singapore Government Singapore
2000
2000
US Sunwall Competition Department of Energy USA Washington, USA 2000
Marina Line Competition Singapore Transport Authority Singapore 2000
251
Research
04
252
Research is a fundamental ingredient of Arup Associates’ approach to design, a root and branch activity of the practice. It is the means whereby Arup Associates has been able, over five decades, to challenge established ways of doing things. The fact that there is no “house style” allows free expression and the development of new ideas. Innovation in structural and services design was a feature of the practice’s work from the time of its inception, a reflection of its multi-disciplinary character. More recently, new disciplines have been brought to bear on the design of buildings. The practice was a leader in the development of computer aided design, but parametric modelling has brought a new dimension to the design process. Increasingly it is recognised that design must embrace issues beyond the strictly functional. Working with social psychologists, part of an expanding collaboration with a number of university departments,
Arup Associates Six Themes
Arup Associates has been looking at the ways in which people respond to built environments. This research has fed into projects such as the BSkyB studios, where the masterplan was as much a social as a physical model, providing spaces for people in the context of a technologically advanced complex. A similar groundbreaking approach to rethinking how people use buildings informed the designs for Coventry University’s engineering faculty, a building embodying in its design new ways of teaching and learning. The practice worked with BT to produce a building which seemed worryingly radical but is now the most popular of the organisation’s workplaces. Nor does the process of collaboration extend only to scientists – at Plantation Lane, Arup Associates worked with a leading artist to produce the most striking example of integrated architectural art in the City of London.
253
2000
254
BT Workstyle 2000 British Telecom
Brentwood England
255
256
BT’s Workstyle project was a radical formula for flexible working, involving home working, job sharing and teleconferencing as an alternative to conventional meetings. The company had inherited a vast estate of buildings, with offices scattered across Britain and the aim was to concentrate its office requirements in a limited number of locations. BT had an existing office building at Brentwood, conveniently located close to central London and the M25, but this was essentially a fixed desk facility, out of tune with the new strategy in which staff would come together when necessary in a flexible office container which was also a social hub where ideas and knowledge could be shared. The new building was also to be a hub, linked to BT’s corporate network and thus to thousands of employees working around the country. The brief was for an inspirational, enjoyable building which would stimulate and motivate its users and be relevant on the local office marketplace should it need to be sub-let (Stanhope were advisers although the building proved hugely popular with users and has never been sub-let). Arup Associates’ design provided top quality space allowing for maximum future flexibility – BT envisaged further evolution of its workplace requirements and possible sub-division was one option to be provided for. The office spaces
are grouped in three zones on three floors, linked by a conservatory restaurant and two winter gardens, with a single external skin protecting the façade and meaning that highly insulated and air tight, externally shaded timber façades for the office users were possible. Landscaped terraces provide further breakout spaces with fine views out to a green landscape. One key aspect of the project, in tune with BT’s sustainability agenda, was the use of a mixed mode ventilation system, with opening sash windows for use when air conditioning is turned off, signalled by a traffic light system engaging all those in the office on how it can be used. With an overlay of building and business, the permanent occupants of the building were located on the perimeter with transient users having flexible space on the inside of the building plan. The external elevation of the building is formed of two layers of glazing to provide a ventilated cavity and thermal flue, protecting the internal spaces from the effects of the external climate as the building is on an exposed and windy site. As part of Arup Associates’ ongoing pursuit of feedback and improvement, the building was subject to an independent survey of users and came within the top 2% of high performing buildings with occupants reporting they were 8% more productive than in their previous buildings.
Masterplan of the development showing the entrance between twin pavilions, screened car parking and formal and informal landscape.
257
258
Diagrammatic section through a typical office floor showing the natural ventilation strategy with opening sash windows, single outer glazing and high ceilings.
Plan of a typical floor showing naturally ventilated zones in yellow, and those permanently air conditioned in blue.
259
National Athletics Stadium - Picketts Lock Lee Valley Park Authority London, England
SEEDA Housing Design Competition Chatham Countryside Properties Chatham, England
2000
2000
2000
5 The Square, Stockley Park Stockley Park Consortium Ltd London, England 2000 The Beacon Plantation Place Marketing Suite British Land Company PLC City of London, England 2000
260
Awards 2001 Royal Fine Art Commission Trust Building of the Year 2000 International Lighting Designers Award Special Citation
St Alphage House - Project Windfall Corporation of London + BT Property London, England 2000
Stratford City Stratford City Development Partners London, England 2000
Cherrywood Business Park Dunloe Ewart/British Land JV Dublin, Ireland 2000
European Medical Centre Surrey Eli Lilly Co. Ltd Windlesham, England 2000
261
Shell Centre, Belvedere Court Lend Lease/Shell London, England 2000
Compaq Office Accommodation Compaq Computers Ltd Reading, England 2000
Project Glasgow Corporation of London London, England 2000
Armstrong Academy The Learning and Business Link Co Ltd Kent, England 2000
262
Wimbledon Arts Centre London, England 2000
Loxley Works Hepworth Properties Ltd Sheffield, England 2000
Hoxton Modular Housing Study & Duxton Arup Advanced Technology Hoxton, London, England 2000
Malpensa Business Park Emprigillio Malpensa, Italy 2000
263
Hull Stadium Hull City Council Hull, England 2001
Regents Park Sports Facility Competition The Royal Parks London, England 2001
2001
West Kowloon Competition West Kowloon Cultural District Authority Hong Kong 2001
South Dublin Study South Dublin County Council Dublin, Ireland 2001
264
Duxton Plain Modular Housing Singapore HDB Singapore University of Lincoln & Humberside Lincoln, England
2001
2001
Housing Prototype East Acton Demonstrator Project Peabody Trust London, England
Awards 2002 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Housing Design Award
2001
Mill Hill School Mill Hill School Foundation London, England 2001
265
Weston Airfield North Somerset Council and English Partnerships Weston-super-Mare, England
Olympic Tennis Stadium Athens Olympic Authority Athens, Greece
2001
2001
Slough Football Club Taylor Woodrow PLC Slough, England 2001
Grange Castle South Dublin County Council Dublin, Ireland 2001
266
Birmingham National Stadium City of Birmingham Birmingham, England 2001
2002
Bridge End Redevelopment Masterplan Ewart Enterprises Ltd Belfast, Northern Ireland 2001 Stratford Regeneration Centre London Borough of Newham London, England 2002
267
2002
268
Arup Campus Prologis Kingspark British Land Company PLC
Solihull England
269
Interior of the naturally lit and ventilated offices at Arup Campus with rooftop cowls passively extracting air.
270
Awards 2004 Civic Trust Award Commendation 2002 Building Services Awards Institution of Civil Engineers ICE Overall Project of the Year Institution of Civil Engineers ICE Midlands Project Award 2001 BCO (British Council for Offices) Midlands Regional Award Timber Industry Awards Shortlisted, Softwood in use out-of-doors Times & Gestetner Digital Office Collection Special Commendation
Solihull is the location for the largest of 14 Arup offices in Great Britain and the base for the practice’s operations in the West Midlands. The Arup Campus, built to accommodate staff previously working from offices in Birmingham and Coventry, is located in a business park close to the M42. Arup Associates began work on the first phase in 1999 – it was completed in 2001, housing around 400 staff. The brief demanded flexible buildings suitable for team working. Natural ventilation, rather than the air conditioning typical of the other buildings in the business park, was developed with the budget paying for the visible architecture and façade necessary for excellent natural ventilation rather than invisible systems for air conditioning. The development, undertaken by British Land and pre-let to Arup, took the form of two steel-framed pavilions, stepping down the sloping site, with four staggered levels of accommodation, linked by a reception area, the pivotal hub for the social organisation. The pavilions are clad in untreated timber, with orientation-specific louvred shutters to control solar gain and opening windows. Rooftop “chimneys” acted as both light scoops and extractors for stale air (and smoke vents in the case of a fire). The thermal mass of exposed concrete plank floors and roof soffits helps to cool the offices in summer, with cool overnight air removing the heat stored the previous day. The focus on air-tightness and
insulation integrity for architectural and structural elements further contributed to the environmental performance of the building. Advanced control of the natural ventilation systems required the co-operation of the users to maximise its benefits. The radical traditionalism of the project, drawing obliquely on vernacular models, contained memories, perhaps, of the iconic Snape Maltings project. The success of the project, and the continuing expansion of Arup’s activities in the region, led to a further phase of development, completed in 2007, providing accommodation for up to 300 more staff. A third pavilion was added, 72m long, incorporating a new social hub for the complex. A number of changes were made to the specification for the first phase of development learning from the experience of the users and further improving environmental performance and user comfort.
The two pavilions in phase 1 were placed along the sloping contours of the site.
271
Section diagram showing the way in which fresh air is drawn into the building and passively extracted through rooftop cowls.
Computer fluid dynamic techniques were used to predict and optimise air velocity and temperature distribution.
272
The two pavilions in the first phase are oriented to benefit from natural light and views.
273
274
The buildings are clad in untreated timber designed to weather to a warm grey in tune with the surrounding landscape.
275
2002
London Olympic Bid Olympic Delivery Authority (ODA) London, England 2002
276
Thames Gateway Study London Development Agency London, England 2002
Redgrave Pinsent Rowing Lake, Caversham Lakes Knowles Capital Projects Caversham, England 2002
Sky Studio Manchester Manchester City Council Manchester, England 2002 Kings Crescent The Peabody Trust London, England
Canning Town English Cities Fund (with LDA and Newham Borough Council) London, England 2002
2002
277
Beijing Olympics National Stadium Co Ltd Beijing, China 2003
Portal Bicentenario Departamentos Portal Bicentenario Concepcion Santiago, Chile 2003
2003
European Southern Observatory Atacama, Chile 2003
278
London Institute London, England 2003 Frankfurt ECB European Central Bank Frankfurt, Germany 2003
Bermondsey Square Urban Catalyst (Bermondsey) Ltd London, England 2003
Battersea Theatre Parkview International Ltd PLC London, England 2003
279
2003
280
Etihad Stadium (Commonwealth / City of Manchester Stadium) Manchester City Council & Manchester 2002
Manchester England
281
Eight circulation towers incorporate access ramps and services and provide a base for eight of the twelve roof masts.
282
Awards 2005 IOC / IAKS Award Gold, Sports Grounds / Stadia Category
Roses Design Awards Architecture Grand Prix Gold Award
IPC / IAKS Distinction Distinction, Sports Grounds / Stadia Category
Roses Design Awards Best Public Building Silver Award
2004 Civic Trust Award
Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Inclusive Design Award
Institution of Structural Engineers IStructE NW Region, Commendation for the Most Innovative Project Institution of Structural Engineers IStructE North West Regional Structural Design Awards Large Project Award
The stadium roof was designed to provide comfortable conditions for both spectators and athletes competing in the Commonwealth Games.
Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award North West Regional Award 2003 Aluminium Extruders Association Imagination Award Highly Commended
British Construction Industry Award BCIA Prime Minister’s Better Public Building Award
Institution of Structural Engineers IStructE Special Award Structural Steel Design Award
Building Services Awards Major Project of the Year
2002 British Construction Industry Award BCIA Major Project Award, High Commendation
Institution of Civil Engineers ICE North West Merit Award Institution of Civil Engineers ICE Brunel Medal Royal Fine Art Commission Trust Building of the Year Institution of Structural Engineers IStructE North West Regional Structural Design Awards Commendation for the most innovative project
The idea for what became the City of Manchester Stadium emerged in the late 1980s when Manchester put in a bid to stage the 1996 Olympic Games. The bid, like that subsequently made for the 2000 Olympics, was unsuccessful but the stadium scheme commissioned from Arup Associates in 1993, now reduced in scale from 80,000 to around 38,000 seats (with scope for a further 10,000 to be installed after the Games), formed the basis of a bid for the 2002 Commonwealth Games, which were awarded to Manchester. The stadium went on site early in 2000 and opened for the Commonwealth Games in July, 2002. The origins of the stadium project were rooted in a regeneration strategy for post-industrial East Manchester – the stadium site, derelict brownfield land, had been a colliery. The design of the stadium was calculated to make it an unmistakeable landmark of urban renewal, its distinctive “saddle” roof, formed of lightweight aluminium and polycarbonate, supported on twelve masts, up to 75m high, by means of an innovative pre-tensioned cable net. This structural strategy was designed to allow for the construction of an additional (north) stand of seating after the Games, when it was planned to convert the stadium for use by Manchester City FC. The form of the stadium, a deep bowl, envisaged by the architects as “an intimate, even intimidating
City Life Awards Building of the Year Manchester Civic Society Renaissance Award Joint Winner Manchester Society of Architects Design Awards MSA Special Award
gladiatorial arena”, was ideal for football. A £40 million conversion programme, completed in time for the opening of the 2003-04 football season, saw the running track removed, the central arena excavated by an additional 20ft/6m, and additional layers of seating installed to remove the divide between pitch and spectators. Every seat has a good view of the action on the pitch. The stadium, now known as the Etihad Stadium following a sponsorship deal, is essentially about sport, with excellent facilities for spectators but none of the extraneous spaces, too often found in stadium schemes, aimed at corporate events. Eight circulation towers, containing access ramps and building services, fringe the arena and provide a base for eight of the twelve roof masts. Public spaces are straightforward and spacious, clear of service ducts and reflecting Arup’s skill at integrating services. The project, integrating architecture, structural and services engineering, has been a spectacular success, so much so that there are plans to expand its seating capacity to 60,000 in time for the staging of the Rugby World Cup there in 2015.
283
The stadium as designed for the Commonwealth Games – the structural design provided for the insertion of additional levels of seating when it was converted for use as a football stadium.
right, below: Plan and section showing the configuration of the stadium in the temporary commonwealth games mode (left) and the legacy football stadium mode (right).
284
The stadium provided a spectacular venue for the Commonwealth Games 2002.
285
The stadium now serves as the home of Premier League team Manchester City.
286
Section showing key environmental design issues with services in the outer edge to keep concourses free for people.
The central arena was excavated by 6.0m to provide for football with extra levels for seating inserted in place of the athletics track.
287
Victoria Transport Interchange Transport for London London, England 2003
Wembley Masterplan Brent Council and London Development Agency London, England 2003
2004
Wuhan Opera House Competition City of Wuhan Wuhan, China 2004
Guangzhou University Marketing and Management Institute of Yunfeng Guangzhou, China 2004
288
Gaoming Pavillion Esquel Enterprises Ltd Gaoming, China Faculty of Earth Sciences University of Cambridge Cambridge, England
2004
2004
Mega Sports Complex, Hotwar Government of Jharkhand Kolkata, India 2004
Torni Basin Pod Durat Worldwide 2004
289
2004
290
Plantation Place British Land Company PLC
City of London England
291
292
Awards 2005 CIBSE Building Services Design Awards Highly Commended Office of the Year Lighting Design Awards Work Place Category Highly Commended 2004 Health & Safety Awards Occupational Health Initiative Category 1998 Royal Academy Summer Exhibition Grand Prize
Diagram illustrating the mixed mode ventilation option in Plantation Place with natural cross ventilation in the upper floors and perimeter natural ventilation of the mid floors. The lower floors are conventionally air conditioned.
The brief for Plantation Place from developer British Land was to provide around 100,000 sq.m. of new office space on a one hectare site, bounded by Fenchurch Street, Rood Lane, Mincing Lane and Eastcheap/Great Tower Street. Arup Associates’ scheme successfully integrates a very large new building, accommodating around 4000 people, into the historic fabric of the City. Plantation Place, a “banking factory”, demonstrated, in the face of competition from Canary Wharf, that large new buildings for the financial services industry could be accommodated at the heart of the City of London. The scheme comprises two buildings, a block of up to 15 storeys on Fenchurch Street and a lower, 10 storey block to the south, each of which has a distinct character. The northern block, 1 Plantation Place, is outwardly extensively glazed, while Plantation Place South, located on the route to the Tower of London, has a loadbearing stone façade with a more limited area of vertical glazing.The loadbearing façade combined with integrated services to give a compressed floor to floor height and allow the incorporation of an extra floor in the scheme, resonant of Watling House. Projecting and shading stone fins are a feature of both buildings, a response to the planning requirement that the development have a “solid” character on the street. The lower façade of 1 Plantation Place is effectively a stone veil, a restatement of the layered façade familiar from many earlier Arup Associates projects. The upper levels of the building, in contrast, with a double skin ventilated façade of frameless glass, allowing for mixed mode ventilation, a thermally tuned internal
façade and dramatically reduced solar gain in summer, read as a transparent, ethereal presence on the skyline. Between the two buildings is a new east/ west pedestrian route, Plantation Lane, a welcome restatement of the City tradition of lanes and alleys. The Fenchurch Street block has an imposing stepped atrium, which funnels sunlight into the building and creates effective office floors above in contrast to a reducing annulus of space. The project involved complex planning negotiations – Wren’s Grade I listed church of St Margaret Pattens stands at the south-west corner of the site and rights to light and views were major issues. The maximum permitted height of the development was 70m. Setbacks reduced the impact of the development on the narrow streets and allowed the creation of landscaped terraces extending around the building. As part of the scheme, the client commissioned artist Simon Patterson to work with Arup Associates on a major work of public art. The work, “Time and Tide”, a glass screen, 41m long, 6m tall, forms one side of Plantation Lane (screening the rear of an undistinguished 1960s block on Eastcheap). The screen is a giant light box, which features close-up images of the surface of the Moon, which constantly change colour. Patterson also designed the pavement lettering, a “carpet of words” related to the history of the site and the City. This is a bold and really effective piece of architectural art, properly integrated into a project which is a rational retort to the “iconic” tendency, with much that is technically innovative.
Plantation Place has a series of set backs at high level, which form garden terraces. The level 10 terrace provides a continuous promenade around the building of 250m length with 360 degree views over the city.
293
Anatomy of the building showing massing, terraces circulation cores and twin atria.
The twin atria at Plantation Place channel natural light from the south into the heart of the building.
294
The Lower levels of Plantation Place feature stone fins with upper levels clad in a double skin of frameless shiplap glazing.
295
The atrium is lit by natural light from the south and provides the building with a dynamic central focus.
296
The all glass backlit reception desk is a focal element to the atrium, whilst the surrounding timber panelling at ground level provides a warm and colourful setting.
Closely spaced atrium fins in triple laminated glass, the centre layer shattered, coruscates with light from the upper atrium and provides an ever changing backdrop to the entrance and reception spaces.
297
PGMS University of Surrey Guildford, England
Awards 2006 Guildford Society Good Design Award
2004
2004
Lift for a disabled client Private London, England 2004
298
Boston House Refurbishment Arup Associates London, England 2004
CTRL Seat Rail Link Engineering UK 2004
Battersea East Hotel Parkview International Ltd PLC London, England 2004
Plantation Place South British Land Company PLC City of London, England 2004
Awards 2005 Structural Steel Design Awards Commendation
299
2004
300
Plantation Lane British Land Company PLC
City of London England
301
302
Awards 2005 Lighting Design Awards Commended Exterior Category
As part of the Plantation Place project, completed in 2004, a new east-west pedestrian route was created between the two buildings which comprise the development, which covers an entire City block. Plantation Lane, a reinvention of the traditional City alleyway, extends from Rood Lane, with the Wren church of St Margaret Pattens, at the south-west corner of the site, to Mincing Lane on the east. The new route had to address the survival of 51 Eastcheap, a dull 1960s block, with a service area to its rear. A strongly linear route was created, narrow and somewhat canyon-like but remarkably dramatic. In conjunction with the planning of Plantation Lane, British Land commissioned artist Simon Patterson to work with Arup Associates on two works of public art. The first, “Time and Tide”, a glass screen, 41m long, 6m tall, forms one side of Plantation Lane (screening the rear of 51 Eastcheap).
The screen is a giant light box, which features close-up images of the surface of the Moon, which constantly change colour. Patterson also designed the pavement lettering, a “carpet of words” related to the history of the site and the City. The two elements create a bold and really effective example of architectural art. Arup Associates describe the project as “an intentional contrast and interplay between the two mediums, or languages…. We deliberately set up a duel between an historically rooted text cut into the ground plane, and the twenty first century resonance of the illuminated screen”.
Plantation Lane provides a new east-west pedestrian link through the Plantation Place development and focuses on the Wren church of St Margaret Pattens.
303
The form of Plantation Lane is dynamic creating constantly changing perspectives. It is a route of discovery.
304
Simon Patterson’s “Concept of words” consists of stone lettering set into the paving of Plantation Lane.
305
306
An illuminated glass screen 41m long forms a side of Plantation Lane masking the rear elevation of 51 Eastcheap and completes together with the pavement a striking artwork “Time and Tide� by Simon Patterson.
307
Queen’s Park, Grenada Cricket Ground Grenada World Cup Organising Committee Grenada, West Indies 2005 Lewisham Gateway LGD (AMEC & Taylor Woodrow Consortium) London, England 2004
2005
Stratford City Office Building Stanhope PLC Stratford, England 2005
308
Dongtan Eco-City, Chongming Island SIIC Shanghai Shanghai, China 2005
Bridge End Redevelopment Sirocco Works Dunloe Ewart (NI) Belfast, Northern Ireland 2005
Arup Deployable Roof In house R&D project Various 2005
309
2005
310
Battersea Masterplan Parkview International Ltd PLC
London England
311
A key feature of Arup Associates masterplan for the Battersea Power Station site was the creation of a “City Wall” incorporating a hotel and screening noise from a joining railway tracks.
The “City Wall” was topped by a landscaped roof with a “great wall walk” open to the public.
312
Battersea Power Station, partly disused since the 1970s, closed completely in 1983. Ten years later, the building and the 14 hectare site surrounding it were acquired by Parkview Group after development plans for the site had been abandoned, leaving the Grade II (later upgraded to II*) listed power station itself derelict and partially demolished. A series of architects subsequently worked on proposals for the site, with Sir Philip Dowson, formerly a partner in Arup Associates, acting as design director. Arup Associates was appointed as masterplanner in 2000. The masterplan envisaged the power station being used as an entertainment and leisure complex and the surrounding land developed with 50,000 sq.m of offices, 80,000 sq.m. of housing, several hotels, and cultural amenities. The masterplan was conceived realistically to provide for phased development of the site. New public spaces would thread through the development – a new bridge across the Thames was to provide a new pedestrian link. A key feature of the masterplan was respect for the power station as a great London landmark. The scale of new building should respect its dominance and an architecture that was materially light and transparent would complement the solid bulk of the industrial monument. One view regarded as highly significant was from the west, where the power station was seen by countless passengers on trains in and out of Victoria Station. The land along the
railway tracks was identified as a suitable site for one of the projected hotels, to be designed by Arup Associates, conceived as a “city wall” forming the protective edge of the development. With limited openings to the railway tracks, the building was designed to open up to the east, with terraces stepping down to the river and a planted roof open to all as a linear park. Its stepped form protected views of the power station, notably that from Chelsea Bridge. Parkview’s decision to sell the site in 2006 led to the abandonment of the Arup Associates masterplan and new consultants were subsequently appointed, producing development proposals less respectful to the power station.
A freestanding pavilion, strongly sculptural in form, was designed to accommodate restaurants.
313
View along the “Great Wall Walk�screening the power station site from the railway serving Victoria station.
The entrance to the hotel from the East Plaza at night.
314
The masterplan made the listed power station the focus of the development with the City Wall stepping down to provide good views of the building from the west.
315
2005
316
Vauxhall Cross Interchange Transport for London
London England
317
The ribbon like canopy of the Vauxhall Cross Interchange is both a highly functional facility for travellers and an urban landmark.
318
Awards 2006 Structural Steel Design Award Certificate of Merit 2005 Regeneration Awards Runner up Best Design-led Regeneration Project
Arup Associates won a competition in 2002 for a new bus station, commissioned by Transport for London and other agencies, adjacent to the Underground and mainline rail station at Vauxhall. The station, close to the Thames, was heavily used by commuters, many of whom transferred to buses here – stops were scattered across the daunting road intersection. Competing schemes were displayed at the station and the public invited to vote on them – Arup’s scheme was the clear winner. Completed in 2005, the interchange provides a covered hub capable of handling 45,000 people per hour at peak times plus staff offices, a small police post, public conveniences, and lifts to a rebuilt station ticket hall. The interchange has been described as “almost a piece of product design”. The idea of an enclosed building, with associated problems of security and maintenance, was rejected in favour of an open canopy, formed as a sculptural ribbon which provides shelter for passengers but equally serves as an urban landmark and an expression of the integation of public transport modes. The 200 metre long canopy (its form taking some inspiration
from the regular lines and curves of London’s bus and Underground maps) is constructed of stainless steel and was designed to allow for prefabricated construction and rapidity of assembly on site. The canopy, three “ribbons” of steel, sweeps down to provide shelter for seating areas, with the outside elements rising up to 6.5m above street level to allow clearance for wind to flush outside air over the top of the double-decker buses. It ends in a dramatic cantilever set at an angle of 20 degrees. The scheme integrates such elements as seating, signage and lighting, avoiding the extraneous clutter seen in many public transport facilities. By night, the structure is dramatically lit. In an early example of urban informatics, the current and accumulated output of the 200 sq.m. of photovoltaic cells, which provide a significant proportion of the building’s power needs, is displayed on a screen at street level to put the energy savings in context for the public. With a modest budget of just £4.5 million, the project has injected an element of civic order into a rather bleak urban landscape.
The structure integrates seating, lighting and signage.
319
Diagram showing the low energy service strategy of the project.
The structure incorporates a battery of photovoltaic cells.
320
The canopy is formed of three ribbons of stainless steel.
The structure was designed for prefabricated construction allowing rapid assembly on site.
321
Assembling the Transport for London logo which is prominently displayed at roof level.
322
The Interchange is linked with the adjacent Underground and mainline rail station and is designed to handle an hourly flow of up to 45,000 passengers at peak times.
323
SE University of Sri Lanka (SEUSL) SE University of Sri Lanka (SEUSL) Oluvil, Sri Lanka 2005
2006
National Centre for Design & Innovation London Development Agency London, England 2006 Puro Spa Bath Durat Worldwide 2006
324
Imperial College Sports Hall and Residences London, England 2006 Asta House Arup Group Ltd London, England 2006
Salford Stadium Welding Start Ltd Salford, England 2006
325
2006
326
British Waterways HQ British Waterways Board
Apsley England
327
The structural design of the BWB headquarters responded to the idea of a floating pavilion addressing the adjacent canal.
328
The (sadly unbuilt) project for canalside offices for British Waterways Board was a classic example of the seamless integration of architecture and engineering. The designs were generated by the constraints of the site: only very limited excavation for foundations was possible and the canal bank had to be protected. Parking had to be provided below the building, which became a “floating pavilion”, cantilevered towards the water. The use of a Vierendeel frame, with storey height cantilever trusses, balanced by a back span, created the appearance of the building floating. The façades
were treated as a diagrid, expressing the structure of the building as its architecture, and clad in timber shingles. The grid opens up towards the tip of the cantilevers. The diagrid is given an added dimension by the addition of shading to the window openings. Inside, office floors are 15m deep and columnfree. The project was one in which architects and engineers worked closely together to create a fusion of the two disciplines. Budget cuts and uncertainty over the future of BWB, which was eventually abolished in 2012, led to the abandonment of the project.
The building touches the ground at only three points, a response to difficult ground conditions of the canalside site.
329
The design provides for 15m deep, column free office floors with meeting rooms overlooking the canal.
330
The structure of the BWB building is expressed externally in the diagonal faรงades, in-filled with timber shingles.
Structural model showing the dynamic performance of the shell of the building, creating dynamic office spaces.
331
Crystal Palace - National Sports Centre London Development Agency (LDA) London, England 2007 Eurostar Passenger Lounges Eurostar (UK) Ltd St Pancras Station, London 2007
2007
Kensington Oval Barbados World Cup Barbados Kingston, Barbados 2007
Awards
2009 WAN Civic Awards Shortlisted 2008 British Construction Industry Award BCIA Commendation IStructE, Sports or Leisure Category Commendation
332
Power of Aluminium Awards Commendation Structural Steel Design Award Commendation World Architecture Awards Shortlisted, Sports Category
2007 BD Architect of the Year Awards Sports Architect of the Year The LEAF Awards Structural Design Of The Year
NYTC - New York, 2nd Avenue Metropolitan Transit Authority New York, USA 2007
St Vincent & the Grenadines National Stadium St Vincent & the Grenadines National Stadium Project of the Government 2007
Arup Campus Phase II Cat A British Land – Cat B Arup Group Solihull, England 2007
Awards 2008 BCO awards 2008 Lighting Design Awards Low Carbon Building of the Year 2008 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Shortlisted, Regional
333
Nokia Beijing Nokia Beijing Beijing, China 2007
BSkyB Campus British Sky Broadcasting Ltd London, England 2007
Temple Mills Depot, Leyton Rail Link Engineering London, England 2007
334
Kingswood, Legal & General Legal & General Assurance Society Ltd Kingswood, England 2007
Liverpool Gateway Art Project (Rocket Junction) Liverpool Land Development Company Liverpool, England 2008
2008
Glass Cantilevered Bench British Land Company PLC London, England 2008
335
2008
336
CITI Data Centre Citigroup
Frankfurt Germany
337
Water storage tanks provide vital back-up for the water cooling system serving the data halls.
338
Awards 2009 The LEAF Awards Shortlisted Best Sustainable Development Category 2008 Financial Services Technology Awards Data centre excellence green energy efficiency award Financial Services Technology Awards Overall Winner 2007 Datacentre Awards Green Data Centre Award
A data centre is, at its essence, a container for the processing and storage of information: many such structures have been no more than air-conditioned, energy-guzzling boxes. Arup Associates’ data centre for Citi on the outskirts of Frankfurt addressed the question for the first time: can a data centre really be “green”? When the practice was appointed to design the new facility for this global financial business early in 2006, the site for the building had not been decided – it could have been in any of the European countries in which Citi operates. The choice eventually fell on the Frankfurt suburb of Am Martinszehnten. The aspiration to create a low-energy, sustainable data centre – typically such buildings consume up to 20 times more power than a typical office block – was in tune with the client’s desire to be seen as an environmentally responsible business. Statistics showing that data centres emit more than 170 million tonnes of carbon annually have generated demands for strict controls to curb their energy consumption. But equally energy costs money – and it is in the interest of companies to reduce their consumption. Arup Associates’ client brief provided for a 20,000 sq.m. building to allow data halls to be occupied in two phases, the first phase also including a modest area of offices and a significant logistics facility. The sustainable agenda of the project had to be balanced against other priorities: a very challenging deadline for the delivery of the building,
(phase one was constructed in under a year, with extensive use of prefabricated components) and, of course, confidence in its technical performance and reliability. The data centre is cooled by a highly efficient water cooling system which optimises free cooling from outside air and, with the use of a reverse osmosis water purifying plant, retrieves up to 90% of the water that would be wasted in a more conventional system, also greatly reducing the number of chemicals used to treat the water. The building’s green credentials are on display externally, with a planted green wall 55m long on its eastern elevation, irrigated by run-off from the roofs, which are planted to reduce thermal gain and encourage wildlife. The offices prioritise a high quality environment for people and are naturally ventilated, with chilled ceilings as part of a back-up system, and heated in winter with heat recovered from the data centre. Timber brise soleil from local oak trees control solar gain while channelling daylight into the offices. The development is the world’s first LEED Platinum certified data centre. The aim to reduce the annual energy consumption by 30% was achieved, with substantial cost savings for the client – and significant benefits for the environment. For Arup Associates, the project fed into continuing research into the design of energy-saving data centres, of which the Meeza data centre in Qatar is an outstanding example.
Data halls are sandwiched between plant areas.
339
Diagram showing the cooling system for the building designed to economise on the use of water and radically reduce energy use.
Data Hall showing floor level air supply and localised extract in ceiling plane.
340
Sprinkler pump plant.
Generator plant room-generators for use if main power supply fails.
Chilled water plant room providing cooling for servers.
341
The eastern elevation of the building features a planted wall irrigated by rainwater run-off from the roof.
342
343
E-Shelter Data Centre E-Shelter GmbH Saunderton, England 2008
QFHQ Education City Qatar Foundation for Education, Science and Community Development (QF) Doha, Qatar 2008
2009
StageZERO Plymouth Rock Studios Plymouth Rock, USA 2009
344
Institute for Manufacturing (IfM) University of Cambridge Cambridge, England
Fitzrovia, Public areas Arup Group Ltd London, England
2009
2009
Tidal Barrier Control Centre Environment Agency Ipswich, England 2009
Donbass Arena FC Shakhtar Donetsk, Ukraine 2009
345
A Social Purpose
05
346
The idea of architecture as a social art, with a social purpose, was fundamental to the Modern Movement. Back in the 1930s Berthold Lubetkin and Ove Arup were committed to the idea of social progress – not to be confused with social engineering. In a very different age, Arup Associates remains committed to the idea of design for people, addressing not just their physical needs but responding to human emotions and creating places which are enjoyable, with a sense of well being, places that enrich the senses. This commitment has a particular relevance to the workplace, where people spend a high proportion of their lives. Practical efficiency and the constraints of a budget drive such projects but it is clear that the most productive workplaces are those where the experience of the user is positive. Arup Associates has something of a reputation for persuading the client to go the extra mile,
Arup Associates Six Themes
to think beyond the purely functional and to aspire to create a special environment. The fruits of this thinking are seen in classic workplace projects such as Gateway 1, with its hanging gardens and the landscaped courts of the CEGB headquarters in Bristol, both buildings now enjoyed by a different set of users. At 1 Finsbury Avenue, Arup Associates created the blueprint for Broadgate, where City workers were given a tranquil setting of squares and pedestrian ways in contrast to the surrounding traffic-choked streets. And the philosophy of design for people extends beyond the workplace to other building types. At the Singapore Sports Hub, the imperative to create corporate entertainment space was set aside in favour of a sports venue which genuinely caters for the whole community.
347
2009
348
Ropemaker Place British Land Company PLC
City of London England
349
350
Awards 2011 WAN Commercial Awards Shortlisted 2010 Association of Interior Specialists Awards Gold Award Interior Fitout Category British Construction Industry Award BCIA Winner, Major Projects Award World Architecture Awards Shortlisted, Office Category 2009 Building Together Awards Winner of the Energy Reduction Award
In common with the earlier Plantation Place project, Ropemaker Place, commissioned by the same client, British Land, demonstrated the capacity of the City of London to accommodate large office buildings and retain its position as London’s premier business district. The site for the development was, however, at a remove from the heart of the City, close to the Barbican and actually located just outside the City boundary in the London Borough of Islington. An undistinguished 12 storey 1980s office building occupied the site and planning consent existed for a scheme commissioned by another developer which, after review by Arup Associates, was abandoned in favour of a complete redesign. While Plantation Place was conceived primarily as a “banking factory”, Ropemaker Place addressed a broader potential tenant base – including, for example, legal services – and was designed to provide a range of flexible spaces ranging from
large dealer floors, of around 4000 sq.m., on levels 1 and 2 to 1100 sq.m. floors on upper levels. The brief was for a building to be completed by spring 2009, just three years after the acquisition of the site, as a shell and core ready for multiple tenants fit-out. Sustainability was a key element in the client brief. The 55,000 sq.m building, rising to a maximum 21 storeys, was conceived as a series of six interlocking volumes, ascending in stages with setbacks providing a succession of garden terraces – a feature which had proved highly successful at Plantation Place and had been a feature of a number of Arup Associates projects since the 1970s. The massing of the building responded to planning prescriptions, which demanded that its height on the northern edge of the site (on Chiswell Street) be no more than six storeys. The upper levels should be set back 3m from the street frontage.
Ropemaker Place was conceived as a series of interlocking volumes with set backs allowing for external garden terraces, culminating in a tower to the south east.
351
Plans showing the changing profile of the building as it rises vertically, with stepped terraces at roof level.
The changing colours in the faรงade are the result of reflection and refraction of light throughout the day.
352
Massing exercises generated a form for the building with a six storey block forming its base and orthogonal terraces then ascending in an anti-clockwise spiral to a full height of 22 storeys on the south-east corner of the block, where the main entrance is located, with the main core adjacent – three zones of 17 lifts serve the upper levels with escalators to levels 1 and 2. Satellite cores are pushed to the perimeter of the building to provide clear floor spaces. Highly efficient and commercially successful – the entire building was quickly let – fundamentally achieved by the success of the integrated design team being able to meet the development programme. The structural design focussed on buildability, utilising heavy existing foundations, together with a new deeper basement, followed by a slip form core, and steel frame superstructure, taking maximum advantage of this phasing to overlap design and construction. Whilst multi-façeted, the sustainability strategies are most clearly manifest in the façade design, one of the keys to the low-energy performance of the project, with
angled window panels arranged in serrated blocks to self-shade and reflect solar gain – the window seats accommodated within the window modules recall those which were a feature of Arup Associates’ Oxbridge projects of the 1960s and 70s. Around 50% of the building envelope is clad using highly insulated glass spandrels incorporating coloured panels and contributing to the building’s highly distinctive aesthetic, in which it is impossible to tell the hand of the architect from the engineer.
The planted terraces are a rare amenity in the city.
353
Escalators in the entrance hall provide additional access to the large trading floors on the first and second floor levels.
354
The north facing atrium provides natural light and focus to the deep lower floors.
Interiors are carefully detailed. The gull wing uplit ceilings are a striking feature of both the entrance and atrium.
355
Arcola Theatre London, England
Natural History Museum Kiosks The Natural History Museum London, England
2009
2010
2009 2010
Chongqing Energy Efficient Demonstration Chongqing Architectural Technology Development Centre & Chongqing Energy Saving Centre Chongqing, China 2009
Sheffield Footbridge Sheffield Council Sheffield, England 2010
356
Xiangjiang Beijing Fashion Centre HKI Beijing, China
Xi’An Chan Ba Fortune Plaza HKI Xi’An, China 2010
2010
Khalifa Bin Zayed Stadium Mubadala Development Co PJSC Abu Dhabi 2010
357
2010
358
Insect Hotel Sponsor: British Land Company PLC
London England
359
The Insect Hotel was constructed using 25 layers of birch wood to provide a variety of habitats for different insect species.
The Insect Hotel was located in the churchyard at St Dunstan in the East in the City of London.
360
Awards 2010 British Land Golden Beetle Award Winner Beyond the Hive
The Insect Hotel was one of Arup Associates’ more unusual projects. In 2010 – the International Year of Biodiversity – British Land and the City of London sponsored a design competition for the design of a ready-made habitat that could encourage insects such as stag beetles, solitary bees, butterflies and moths to breed in urban areas. The urban environment – with formerly neglected areas which might have formed breeding grounds developed with buildings – was increasingly hostile to biodiversity, which is fundamental to the well-being of the natural environment. It was envisaged that the containers might be placed in a number of sites around the City, with churchyards one likely location. (The first was placed in the churchyard of St Dunstan in the East.) The design had to address the varying needs of the threatened species – stag beetles, for example, thrive in rotten wood, while butterflies and moths need dry conditions.
The design brief allowed for a container measuring no more than 1500mm x 1500mm and 500mm deep. Arup Associates’ design for an “Insect Hotel” provided for a structure fabricated from 25 layers of 20mm thick stacked birch wood ply to provide a series of compartments which could be filled with waste materials attractive to nesting insects. The compartments were designed on the Voronoi pattern, an irregular lattice like the wing of a dragonfly. Narrow slots in the sides of the “hotel” provide a habitat for butterflies and moths. The top was formed as a trough for planting, which would absorb rainwater.
The compartments, based on a Voronoi pattern similar to a dragonfly’s wing structure, were designed in a variety of sizes to take different materials attractive to insect species.
361
Lancaster Royal Grammar School (LRGS) Lancaster Royal Grammar School Lancaster, England 2010 EFW Bid Support Covanta Leeds, England 2011
2011
Dalston Square London Development Agency (LDA) London, England 2011
Philips Zero Carbon Emission Building Philips China Shanghai, China 2011
Awards 2011 MIPIM Architectural Review Future Projects Awards Winner, Sustainable Building Category World Architecture Awards Shortlisted, Future Commercial Category
362
KASC Phase 2 Stadium Competition Saudi Aramco Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 2011
NLWA LBB Pinkham Way North London Waste Authority London, England 2011
KASC Phase 1 - Sports Academy Saudi Aramco Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 2011
KASC Phase 1 - Athletes` Housing Saudi Aramco Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 2011
363
2011
364
Qatar Showcase, FIFA Qatar 2022 Bid Committee
Doha Qatar
365
Structure supporting the ETFE fabric of the roof shade.
366
Awards 2011 Structural Awards Shortlisted Sport or Leisure Category World Architecture Awards Shortlisted Sports Category
In December, 2010, Qatar was selected, against fierce competition, as the host nation for the 2022 Soccer World Cup – the smallest country (with a population of under two million) yet chosen to stage the event. A key challenge which Qatar faced was proving that its extreme climate was not a major obstacle to its selection. The zero-carbon showcase stadium designed by Arup Associates in eight weeks and completed to a five month construction programme in 2010 in time for the official visit by FIFA officials, was a key factor in Qatar’s success. The brief was developed in consultation with the Qatar 2022 team – the objective was to demonstrate how a sports stadium could be cooled to a comfortable level in a very hot climate using sustainable technology and it was decided that this could best be demonstrated by building a mini-stadium. The 500 seat showcase would change the agenda for sport in hot climates and pave the way for a carbon neutral event. Playing sport in hot climates is nothing new – stadia in Arizona and Las Vegas are mechanically cooled – but Qatar set out to prove the appropriateness of sustainable methods of creating a comfortable environment for spectators and a safe one for athletes. When FIFA officials visited the showcase stadium, the external temperature was
44 degrees – the temperature on the pitch was 23 degrees. Arup Associates created a blueprint which married radical environmental design to memorable architectural form. The steel canopy roof of the stadium is designed to remain closed during the hottest hours of the day or during infrequent sand storms – the 2022 matches will be played in the evenings. Heavily insulated by a blanket of ETFE pillows, it is then opened – FIFA preferring that games are played under an open sky. The roof rotates to shade the arena from late afternoon sun and protect it from the prevailing wind, with thermal mass helping to moderate the environment. The stadium is cooled by a solar system, using energy gathered by a solar thermal “farm”, with mirrors tracking the sun and powering an absorption chiller. Chilled water is stored in ice in a tank below ground, to be utilised in the evening to serve air handling units serving the stands and pitch. An additional photovoltaic installation feeds directly into Qatar’s national grid and, along with the solar thermal technology, is modular and designed to be demountable and relocated to other hot climates after 2022. In this way, the World Cup in Qatar will benefit other countries with similar climatic challenges.
Plan of the FIFA showcase.
367
Shaded circulation area with high thermal stadium walls.
368
Sketches showing the energy system of the showcase.
Solar energy systems support the showcase.
369
370
The roof of the showcase stadium remains closed by day to exclude the heat of the sun and is opened by night for games. Diagram showing the design of the opening roof.
371
2011
372
BSkyB Sky Studios British Sky Broadcasting Ltd/Stanhope PLC
London England
373
The giant ventilation chimneys along the east elevation of the building driving the natural ventilation system and shading the faรงade.
374
Awards 2013 British Construction Industry Award BCIA Sky Wind Turbine Shortlisted Institution of Civil Engineers ICE Sky Wind Turbine, Shortlisted Structural Steel Design Award Sky Wind Turbine, Shortlisted 2012 Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award London Region Award Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Winner London Sustainability Award 2011 Building Awards Shortlisted, Cut the Carbon CIBSE Building Performance Awards Shortlisted New Build Project of the Year Energy Awards Winner Judge’s Supreme Award Energy Awards Winner Energy Efficient New Build Project of the Year European Sustainability Awards Shortlisted, Living Category Guardian Sustainable Business Awards 2011 Shortlisted, Built Environment Category International Green Awards Shortlisted, Best Green Intelligent Buildings Award 2010 Building Sustainability Awards Winner, Sustainable Project of the Year (over £10M) World Architecture Awards (WAF) Shortlisted, Production Category
Founded in 1990, BSkyB now employs more than 24,000 people and has an annual income of over £7 billion. It is based at Osterley, close to the M4 on the western edge of London, inhabiting a collection of industrial sheds and run of the mill office buildings. Sky’s decision to commission Arup Associates, after a long and broad-ranging competition, to design a new production centre at Osterley for its television channels, “a factory for creativity”, produced Europe’s most sustainable broadcasting studio complex to date. The project, the first phase of a major development programme by Sky at Osterley, drew heavily on the unrivalled multi-disciplinary skills of the practice, with a significant input from Arup Acoustics. The brief was for a very large and flexible building of around 23,000 sq.m. over 100m long, to house recording, post-production and transmission facilities to be up and running in time for the 2012 Olympics (allowing 18 months for a very complex technical fit-out). Sky Studios, as the building was christened, was to contain eight broadcast studios on its lower levels, offices for nearly 1400 staff, and data rooms for 400 plus computer servers. Transmission platforms were to be located at the top of the building, creating a ‘make, shape, share’ vertical configuration of functions. A significant element in the client brief, and one to which Arup Associates responded enthusiastically, was Sky’s desire to be seen as an environmentally sustainable operation. An increase in active social spaces, recovery of heat so that there are no boilers in the building, free cooling and the inclusion of a large biomass combined cooling, heat and power plant were all aspects of the ground-breaking design. Naturally ventilated television studios too were, and remain a world first, given the large amount of heat created by studio lighting. The design approach married structural design to a servicing strategy,
with the deep steel beams forming the studio floor slabs and ceilings creating a plenum and path for natural ventilation. The heat of lights and cameras drives the hot air upwards, to be exhausted via a series of 13 huge chimneys which define the – distinctively industrial – external appearance of the building. Mechanical cooling is available as a back-up, with the chimneys then functioning as return air ducts. The middle floors of the building contain the data centres, production facilities and editing suites, with people places such as office space wrapped around them, these on each side of the building enjoy natural light and fresh air from opening windows and louvres, the east side also using chimney atria to help ventilate the deeper plan space. A glazed atrium at the south end of the building provides a connection between all levels and houses cafes, breakout and meeting spaces with stairs as the primary vertical circulation, creating a space of genuine social interaction. A further element in the environmental strategy for the project was the construction of a 56m high wind turbine. Capable of generating 100kW of power at peak wind conditions, it represents a breakthrough UK agreement with National Air traffic services to locate a wind turbine on the Heathrow approach path. The turbine is a strikingly structural bespoke design, clad in perforated aluminium. It is a landmark, part of a landmark project in sustainable design.
Site plan and plan of the building at ground level, showing naturally ventilated studio spaces at the perimeter.
375
The building is an industry world first – integrated transition platform, studios, data centres, production facilities, editing suites and transmission platforms are integrated in a single ‘make, shape, share’ facility.
The structural skeleton of the building with services systems at roof level. Natural ventilation shafts wrap around the exterior.
376
Exterior view – the building has a machine aesthetic.
377
Cut-away of the building, showing the circulation of the natural ventilation to serve studios and offices.
378
The wind turbine is an effective element in the renewable energy strategy of the project.
379
The social hub located at the south west corner of the building features stairs rather than lifts as the primary circulation mode.
380
The atrium stair serves all levels and is the social heart of the building.
381
Stage doors serving the studios with natural ventilation, air intake in front and at the base of ventilation towers.
382
383
KASC Phase 1 - Railway Station Saudi Aramco Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 2011
2011
KASC Phase 1 - Academy Campus Saudi Aramco Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 2011
Ding He Tower China Southern Power Grid Ding He Property Insurance Co ltd Shenzhen, China 2011
384
ICBC Jiading Data Centre ICBC Shanghai Shanghai, China 2011
Fortune Plaza Tower Chongqing Chongqing, China 2011
Preston Beach Preston Beach Developments JV PTY Ltd Australia Huawei Campus Wuhan Shenzhen Huawei Investment & Holding Co Ltd Wuhan, China
2011
2011
385
Zanotti Shoe Giuseppe Zanotti/Wallpaper* Milan, Italy 2012
2012
Mumbai Convention Centre ASK – Charitable Foundation & Mumbai University Mumbai, India 2012
Nine Elms Marketing Suite Ballymore Group London, England 2012
386
King Abdullah International Foundation for Charity and Humanitarian Activities Courtyard Saudi Aramco Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 2012
Natural History Museum Feasibility Studies The Natural History Museum London, England 2012
King Abdullah International Foundation for Charity and Humanitarian Activities Saudi Aramco Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 2012 King Abdullah International Foundation for Charity and Humanitarian Activities Masterplan Saudi Aramco Riyadh, Saudi Arabia 2012
387
2012
388
Faculty of Engineering and Computing Coventry University
Coventry England
389
The interior of the Engineering Faculty building is spatially dynamic encouraging the breakdown of divisions between disciplines.
390
Awards 2013 Built in Quality Awards Winner, Higher Education Category BD Architect of the Year Awards Currently Shortlisted Higher Education Category British Construction Industry Award BCIA Currently Shortlisted Concrete Society Awards Shortlisted Royal Institute of British Architects RIBA Award Winner, Regional Higher Education Category The LEAF Awards Shortlisted, Public Building Education Category WAN Education Awards Shortlisted
The building is planned around a central courtyard which is an oasis in a challenging urban context.
Coventry University, in contrast to its local rival, the University of Warwick, occupies a campus in central Coventry, close to the cathedral and Herbert Art Gallery. The new building housing the faculty of engineering and computing was commissioned in 2008 as part of an ambitious expansion and redevelopment programme – the university has more than 31,000 full and part-time students. Engineering has a special resonance in Coventry, a city with a long history as a centre for innovative manufacture, and Arup Associates’ building, completed in 2012, is a striking symbol of this heritage but, more importantly, a dynamic centre for training the engineers of the future. As a relatively new university (though with origins extending back to the Victorian period) Coventry has shown itself willing to explore new ways of learning, breaking down the traditional barriers between disciplines. The engineering faculty, with around 4000 students, has developed close links with local industry. The brief for the faculty’s new home was for a building that would encourage the free exchange of ideas within an activity-led, project-based approach to learning. The site, on the edge of the city centre, was prominently placed close to a major traffic artery which cut across the campus – a strong architectural statement was needed. In practical terms, the 14,500 sq.m.building, planned around a central courtyard, had to accommodate specialised facilities such as flight simulators, a
wind tunnel and accommodation for a Harrier jump jet, lecture theatres, collaborative classrooms with extensive IT provision and academic offices. It would be a building, itself a learning tool, inhabited around the clock. With its own philosophy of integration, Arup Associates was well equipped to address the radical client brief, abandoning the idea of independent spaces around circulation routes in favour of interconnected, flexible spaces, punctuated by atria and balconies, which incorporate circulation, natural ventilation and daylight – visual connectivity was seen as the key to social interaction in a hothouse of inventive thinking. Internally, both the concrete and steel structure and the services are freely exposed and carefully coordinated with structural forces annotated on the steel members in the circulation spaces – the main plantroom, far from being hidden away, has a high level walkway which allows students to look down at the boilers and other equipment – all part of the learning experience. The building is equipped with a low-energy, mixed mode ventilation system and data from the building management system are displayed on a screen in the reception area. The exterior of the building, described by the Architects’ Journal as “sheer, red-blooded tectonic joy”, is visually striking, clad in profiled aluminium panels arranged in a hexagonal shading panel laid on a glulam timber frame and incorporating a high degree of insulation.
The stepped floorplates encourage connectivity through the building.
391
The form of the Engineering Faculty building provides for natural ventilation strategy and channels natural light into the interior spaces.
The exterior of the building is clad in profiled aluminum panels in an hexagonal pattern. Internal spaces are designed for interactive, project led teaching.
392
The form of the window opening is designed to provide daylight for the interiors whilst attenuating solar gain.
393
Brunel University Estates Strategy Refresh London, England King Abdullah International Foundation for Charity and Humanitarian Activities Heritage Museum Saudi Aramco Riyadh, Saudi Arabia
2012
2012
2012
Shanghai Loop, Zhongshan Park Changning District Shanghai, China 2012
Kings College London Development Framework London, England 2012
394
Grosvenor Westminster London, England 2012
2013
Forth Bridge Control Centre, Scotland Transport for Scotland and Traffic Scotland Queensferry, West Lothian, Scotland 2013
Wuxi Fortune Plaza HKI China Land Ltd Shanghai, China 2012
395
2013
396
Sports Centre, Phase 1 University of Cambridge
Cambridge England
397
The form of the building is designed to integrate with the surrounding landscape at the edge of Cambridge University’s expanding west Cambridge campus.
398
The competition was won by the practice in 1999, but funding did not become available until 2011 when Arup Associates were reappointed to design the first phase of three. Cambridge University’s sports centre, the first phase of which opened in autumn, 2013, is located in west Cambridge, where the University is developing what is effectively a new campus of faculty and laboratory buildings. The building is located at the edge of the new campus, close to open countryside. Its form responds to that context, its natural contoured form mediating between the wider formal masterplan and the nearby open countryside. Cambridge has a long and distinguished sporting history, but it was felt that its facilities were lagging behind those of other universities. The sports centre project, providing facilities for the University’s 18,000 students and 9,000 staff, was launched on the basis of a generous donation by an anonymous benefactor in 2011. The first phase of the centre was constructed in 18 months and includes a vast sports hall; housing two full-size courts for basketball and provision for badminton, five a side football, volleyball and other team games. Elsewhere in the building, a large studio space caters for martial arts, yoga, fencing,
Arup Associates’ masterplan provides for the phased development of a complex of sports facilities for Cambridge University’s students and staff.
dancing and gymnastics. Squash and fitness courts also sit within phase 1 and a fitness suite, cafe and lounge with audio-visual provision are also provided. The second and third phases of the project, awaiting funding, include a swimming pool, a wing of indoor tennis courts and a sports medicine centre. The desire for an excellent sporting environment within the centre led to the adoption of north light for the main hall, with integrated natural ventilation. The use of Building Information Modelling integrated across all disciplines meant that the structural steel, architectural feel and the crafting of the detailing could be optimised early in the design and continued throughout the contractor’s detailing phase. The imperative for rapid construction, using a design and build contract, challenged Arup Associates to develop a kit of parts approach to the structure of the building and to work with the contractor to ensure the connections detailing were thoroughly resolved. University Chancellor Professor Sir Leszek Borysiewicz said “This is a key project for the University. …This state-of-the-art design marks the start of a new era for Cambridge sport.”
Early study model showing exploration of possible structure and materials strategies.
399
400
The large sports hall which is the largest element in phase 1 of the sports centre, benefits from controlled daylight and natural ventilation.
401
2013
402
Fourth Plinth Trafalgar Square Royal Society of Arts and Sculpture at Goodwood
London England
403
404
London is now the principle crucible in Europe for art: the contemporary London audience is collectively far more receptive to the unexpected and relishes work that expands and stretches the imagination. Art is delivered in an unending flow through a variety of ‘platforms’ from marginally illegal street graffiti to well organised public arts programmes, such as ‘The Fourth Plinth’ in Trafalgar Square. There is a welcome trend to scrutinise and comment, both in the media, internet and in public forums whilst also becoming the focus of associated educational and outreach projects. Since 1998, Arup Associates has been involved with the temporary exhibition of sculptures on the empty plinth located at the North West corner of Trafalgar Square. Initially the project involved assisting the Royal Society of Arts and Sculpture at Goodwood in obtaining all the necessary consents and approvals from a variety of agencies including English Heritage and the then Royal Fine Arts Commission.
This process required extensive computer visualisation of sculptures by Mark Wallinger, Bill Woodrow and Rachel Whiteread in the context of Trafalgar Square, and supporting information to verify the feasibility of constructing and exhibiting each piece. The project was successfully completed with the unveiling of Rachel Whiteread’s sculpture ‘Monument’ in May 2001. Based on the Mortimer Committee’s recommendation that the Plinth remain a venue for ‘the contemporary temporary’, the Mayor of London continued the project. So far there have been nine works shown. Arup Associates is continuing its association with the project as part of the Fourth Plinth Commissioning Group, contributing to the Mayor’s choice of the best contemporary sculpture for the heart of London.
The desire for ‘contemporary temporary’ sculpture on the Grade 1 listed monument on a rolling 18 month cycle required a supporting armature to be designed to fix the works to, to evenly distribute the loads and to contribute as a counter weight for wind load.
405
Mitsui Fudosan Building Mitsui Fudosan Tokyo, Japan Current
Current
GSK Shanghai Glaxo Smith Klein Shanghai, China Current
406
Tokyo Gas Shibura Plan Mitsui Fudosan Tokyo, Japan Current Yaesu-2 Chome North District Redevelopment Project Mitsui Fudosan Tokyo, Japan Current
GSK Masterplan Glaxo Smith Klein UK Current
407
Current
408
Druk White Lotus School The Drukpa Trust
Ladakh Northern India
409
410
Awards 2013 Architecture in Stone 2013 Award Winner 2012 British Council for School Environments Awards Winner Test of Time Award The LEAF Awards Best Sustainable Development of the Year 2012 2009 BCSE Industry Awards Winner of the Inspiring Design Award International category Design for Asia Award Grand Award WAN Education Awards Shortlisted 2005 Sinclair Knight Merz Award for Achievement in Development 2003 BCCB Award for International Expertise 2002 World Architecture Awards Best Green Building World Architecture Awards Best Education Building World Architecture Awards Best Asian Building
The Druk White Lotus School project has been one of the most demanding undertaken by Arup Associates in collaboration with the wider Arup, but equally one of the most rewarding and instructive, forming a learning curve for the practice and attracting huge interest internationally. The origins of the project extend back to the early 1990s when the Drukpa Trust was formed under the sponsorship of the Dalai Lama to support the development of a school in Ladakh, close to the Himalayas, which would both equip local children to develop skills and gain employment in a modern society but equally preserve the traditional Buddhist culture of Tibet, of which mountainous and remote Ladakh is one of the last strongholds. The school would have science laboratories and computers – but also a temple. Arup Associates was approached to prepare a masterplan for the phased development of the school, eventually catering for around 750 pupils aged from 4 to 18 from across Ladakh (including provision for boarding). The site for the school was in a thinly inhabited, arid region, 3500m above sea level, freezing and snow-bound in winter, extremely hot in summer. The design of the buildings had to address this challenging climate in which water was always in short supply. The use of imported energy was ruled out. The remoteness of the site made the cost of transporting building materials there potentially prohibitive. The region was seismically extremely active, so that any building there would need to be capable of withstanding earthquakes – the logical approach to construction in such a context was to study the traditional building techniques of the region.
A final element in the developing brief for the school was the need for its buildings to embody some of the symbolism associated with the Buddhist faith. The plan of the complex takes its inspiration from the sacred mandala, which represents the universe and generally takes the form of a circle within a square, the latter with openings in each side. Arup Associates’ commitment to the project has been consistent over the years, with a member of the practice resident on site for periods during the construction of the school between 1997 and 2013, beginning with the nursery and primary school component (completed in 2001). The building materials are mud brick, granite and wood, with high thermal walls and mud roofs designed to provide comfortable conditions in summer heat and store warmth in winter. The project brought together ancient and modern technologies, with solar power providing hot water for showers and clothes washing – together with the small area of gardens, these account for all the water used on the site. Latrines use a dry system for disposing of waste, with a solar flue allowing their operation as composting toilets and effectively removing smells. Phase 2 of the project, the junior school, was completed in 2006. Despite the setback caused by severe floods in 2010, the final phase of construction, including the secondary school and library, will be completed in 2013.
411
The Druk White Lotus School project brought together both ancient and modern approaches in building technology in a region with an exceptionally challenging climate. The dining hall shown here is a timber framed structure.
412
The infant and nursery school focusses, like other buildings, on a central courtyard.
413
The development of the school extended over a period from 1997 to 2013 in line with a phased masterplan.
Section through the central mandala showing entrance courtyard and library.
414
The school was constructed using traditional materials (mudbrick, stone and timber) and techniques.
Exploded axonometrics showing timber components in the construction of the school, designed for seismic stability.
415
Diagram showing the arrangement of the buildings to benefit from morning and evening sun.
416
Timber structure supporting solar collectors: old and new technologies meet.
Exploded perspective of the library at the centre of the mandala.
417
Current
418
MEEZA Data Centre
Doha Qatar
419
Air intakes on the roof of the Meza data centre.
Data storage halls are located between zones of plant which provide insulation.
420
Continuing the series of “deep green” data centres designed by Arup Associates with a radical reduction in energy consumption the key objective, the practice designed two data centres for Meeza in Qatar. The centres – M-Vault 2 and 3 – are located respectively at Meeza’s own Al Dayeencampus, 30km from Doha, and at the Qatar Science and Technology Park. In contrast to the earlier, ground-breaking Citi Data Centre in Frankfurt, the Meeza projects had to address the challenge of an exceptionally aggressive hot, dry and dusty climate, where temperatures can exceed 50 degrees. This informs a host of issues, including shading and very bright daylight for people working in the offices, careful materials choice for performance and resilience particular to the region. Using water cooling, as in Frankfurt, was not an option in the context of the desert. Cooling system
condensate is collected and stored for washrooms and irrigation. The data halls are enclosed by zones of plant which require no cooling but provide a layer of insulation. A further air-conditioned zone provides a further buffer to the data halls, an “onion skin” strategy which greatly reduces the energy usage needed to cool the building. MV-2 still under construction is on target to achieve tier III accreditation, and LEED Platinum status, the first data centre in the region to receive this recognition. MV-3 presented rather different design challenges, since it was an intervention into an existing complex to provide 500 sq.m of data storage space. The retention of the existing building structure, with its embodied energy, and the skilful insertion of the new facility earned the project LEED Gold status.
The shaded entrance area to the centre.
421
Current
422
House with No Name Private
Hampshire England
423
The House with No Name is a complex of buildings designed for a site within a national park.
424
The family house component of the development is set apart from the other buildings arranged around a central courtyard.
Designed for a client who wishes to remain anonymous, this house was one of the first new residential developments to be approved within the South Downs National Park since its designation in April, 2011. The client initially approached Arup Associates in 2010 for advice on the sustainable design aspects of a proposed new house project, replacing an undistinguished 1970s farmhouse, which was to utilise sustainable materials and maximise the opportunity for a wholesome family life, addressing issues of energy, water and waste management. The practice was subsequently appointed to design the house. In dialogue with the client the practice developed the idea of a “pavilion in the woods” set in a modern version of an historic English pleasure garden. The family house itself, planned around a central “great hall”, is part of a sequence of buildings, including a guest house, a swimming pool, and a gallery, all arranged around a closed courtyard, and is located in the most secluded part of the site, overlooking open country.
The complex consists of a “family” of buildings, all designed for modular construction using a prefabricated kit of parts, a radical departure for a prestigious residential project. The buildings are of a sustainable timber factory-manufactured system clad in vertical timber slats, a material that blends easily with the surrounding landscape. Construction, undertaken by a German company which prefabricated the components for the buildings, took just a year. The project is a striking reinvention of the traditional English manor house, entirely contemporary in design but at ease with its context.
425
The buildings are constructed using prefabricated components designed for modular construction and assembled on site to a fast track schedule.
The use of timber in the cladding is in tune with the rural context.
426
427
Pioneering Technology
06
428
Arup Associates has always been a research based atelier, feeding the products of research, inter-professional dialogue and debate into the design process. Over 50 years the practice has pioneered the application of new technologies to the world of construction. Arup Associates’ unique multi-disciplinary structure, embracing architecture, engineering and, increasingly, many other disciplines, provides the ideal forcing ground for new ideas. The emphasis has always been on how technology can be applied to improve the human condition – technical advance not for its own sake but for a social end. Sometimes the practice has to fight its cause – to convince a client that the proposed solution is the right one. In the field of sustainable design, everyone benefits from low-energy solutions, including building owners reaping rewards in terms of lower running costs.
Arup Associates Six Themes
The history of low-energy design as a key concern of the practice extends back to projects such as CEGB Bristol and Gateway 2, the latter pioneering the (then radical) idea of naturally ventilated spec offices. Working with enlightened clients, environmentally progressive strategies have been applied to major projects globally. Arup Associates’ “showcase” projects have provided a link between the fields of research and practical building and demonstrated the benefits of sustainable design. The FIFA Showcase for Qatar has created interest in the development of a new generation of low-energy sports stadia across the globe, responding to the challenges of extreme climatic conditions. In Britain, Arup Associates worked with BT to design the Solar Showcase, demonstrating the immense potential of solar power to supply the energy needs of buildings.
429
Current
430
Istanbul Sabiha Gรถkรงen Control Tower HEAS Inc
Istanbul Turkey
431
The Control Tower at Gรถkรงen airport is a lightweight steel structure, designed to withstand the effects of earthquakes, the region is seismically active.
432
Awards 2012 World Architecture Awards (WAF) Shortlisted, Future Projects Infrastructure Category
View from the staff amenity building at the base of the Control Tower.
Sabiha Gökçen Airport is Istanbul’s second international airport, with a new terminal building (engineered by Arup) opened in 2009 and designed to handle 25 million passengers annually. Arup Associates, with further input from Arup engineers, was commissioned to design the control tower, linked to the construction of an additional runway at the fast-growing airport, which is located on the eastern side of the Bosphorus. Most significantly, the airport is just 20km from a fault line in one of the most seismically active regions on earth – all the buildings at the airport are seismically engineered. In designing the tower, the Arup team had not only to provide for the stability of the structure in the event of an earthquake but also to ensure that the communications, radar and data equipment, and the services powering it, which it houses, would remain fully operational. Airport control towers are generally heavy concrete structures - which are vulnerable to seismic shock. Arup Associates set out to design a lightweight steel structure. A number of designs were evaluated by the interdisciplinary team, taking into account not only seismic issues and the
potential impact of high winds, causing the tower to sway, but also the aspiration to create a landmark structure which would be a symbol of the airport and the progressive image of Turkey which it embodies – it is named after the country’s first woman fighter pilot. The tower is 112m high, designed to provide a view across the entire airport from its three-storey control centre at the top. (A base building contains changing rooms, a staff restaurant and other facilities.) Seismic effects were mitigated by adopting a steel structure which reduces the total weight of the tower by around 40% compared to a more conventional concrete tower. Giant bearings at the base of the tower allow it to move up to 1m in any direction in an earthquake, further mitigating seismic effects. Service connections are jointed to move with the structure. The form of the tower, combined with a cladding system of alternate solid and void panels, baffles the impact of high winds. This is a classic example of a highly practical and more effective approach to design which has produced a structure of iconic form, already seen as a symbol of the new airport.
433
434
435
Current
436
Jaguar Land Rover Engine Manufacturing Centre UK
Wolverhampton England
437
The Jaguar Land Rover Engine Facility provides an exceptionally clean environment and a large 30m clear span structure, to provide flexible floor space to accommodate the current and future needs of the manufacturing process. The space is naturally lit by north lights designed into the saw tooth profile of the roof structure.
438
Jaguar Land Rover’s new engine manufacturing centre draws on Arup Associates’ half century of experience in the design of industrial buildings, but its sustainable agenda is radical and in tune with the client’s ethos of innovative design. The site for the £500m plant employing around 1400 staff, is on brownfield land close to the M54 motorway outside Wolverhampton. The 95,000 sq.m. building contains north lit machine and assembly halls which are large spaces flanked by office and support spaces. The plan is simple but allows for maximum flexibility and scope for future expansion – this accommodated the evolution of the client brief as the project progressed. The large span steel roof framing, supported on columns spaced at 30m intervals, is arranged with an open truss form to give high level services distribution, a clear hierarchy, modulated to suit the north light architecture.
The building is targeting BREEAM Excellent through a number of sustainable features. The building is naturally ventilated, with natural north light channelled through the 3m high roof lights. The roof also accommodates solar hotwater panels and extensive photovoltaics to partially offset the manufacturing process. The essence of the project is its flexibility, allowing for the ongoing development of the manufacturing process.
439
The building is organised as two major manufacturing halls with staff support spaces in between providing legible wayfinding and access.
Diagram illustrating Jaguar Land Rover’s manufacturing process forming the basis for the planning of the facility.
440
Long section through the staff support building, providing an access spine for the complex and including the main entrance, staff amenities and office.
The office component to the facility is mixed mode using a combination of cross and stack ventilation.
441
Current
442
King Abdullah Sports City Saudi Aramco
Jeddah Saudi Arabia
443
The circulation zone is screened to exclude wind and dust.
444
Awards 2012 World Architecture Awards (WAF) Shortlisted, Future Projects Leisure-led Development Category
The King Abdullah Sports City Stadium forms the centrepiece of the massive Sports City project, intended to transform attitudes to participatory sport in Saudi Arabia. The 60,000 seat stadium provides the Kingdom’s first world class football stadium, home to Jeddah’s two Premier League clubs, along with a separate 1200 seats athletics facility suitable for international events. The stadium, designed in accordance with FIFA/IAFA rules, is located in a desert-like environment some 10km from the centre of Jeddah. Arup Associates’ project designed in collaboration with Arup is a response to cultural as well as physical context. Given its location, environmental issues were clearly woven into the architectural and structural design. The Saudi football season is played in winter, not in the hot summer months. Normally the stadium will be used only by night – high temperatures of 45 degrees plus rule out daytime use. The brief evolved to mechanically cool only areas with a high density of people such as stairs and lounge areas: the main stadium will have porous architecture and is designed to enable effective natural ventilation by harnessing desert breezes.
The diamond-patterned screen set in V-shaped tiedown frames– its form has echoes of the traditional Arabic mashrabiya – protects spectators from wind and dust whilst allowing bulk air movement for ventilation and provides shade. Seating on three levels offers 360 degree views of the pitch, at the heart of the stadium bowl, itself rooted firmly in the soil. The curvaceous enclosure of the stadium incorporates changing rooms, media facilities, spaces for corporate entertaining, the royal box, and VIP accommodation. Located within a firmly Islamic country, the stadium is oriented towards Mecca. Adjacent is a large mosque. Constructed under royal patronage the stadium is designed to accommodate men and women, a significant change in attitudes. This landmark sports project is a classic example of the integration of architecture and engineering, its memorable form being a clear expression of geometrically influenced structure.
The stadium will be used mainly at night on account of the extreme desert climate.
445
The King Abdullah Stadium is designed to operate in the extreme climate of Saudi Arabia.
446
The stadium bowl is designed to give spectators amazing views, whlst protecting them from wind and dust.
447
Exploded perspective of the mosque forming part of the entrance sequence to the King Abdullah Sports City.
448
Study model for a component of the entrance screen to the prayer hall.
Plan of the Mosque with the main prayer hall placed centrally and ablution and changing areas adjacent.
449
Current
450
Doha City Tennis Stadium Qatar Olympic Committee
Doha Qatar
451
Exploded anatomy of the building showing support spaces and bowl.
452
Awards 2013 AR Future Awards 2013 Winner of the Sport and Stadia Category
Won in international competition, this Olympic standard ATP 1000 compliant, 15,000 seat stadium was designed in collaboration with the IMG Group, which manages tennis tournaments, amongst many other sporting events, across the world. The stadium is designed to provide an outstanding spectator experience, with excellent views of matches. Described by tennis star Rafael Nadal as “a theatre of champions�, the stadium bowl is contained within a highly sculptural structure, clad in white marble, architecturally striking but highly efficient in engineering terms. The stadium is unusually flexible and can accommodate basketball, volleyball and other sports as well as tennis and is adaptable as an excellent concert venue. A commercial concourse wraps around the stadium bowl, with a layer of VIP boxes. The structure has been developed to be highly efficient by making use of the circular bowl geometry, saving money, materials and embodied carbon emissions in a country where everything needs to be imported.
The Stadium is designed to be used and be commercially successful throughout the year, from the comparatively cool and comfortable winter months to the hotter mid-summer conditions. The bowl will operate as naturally ventilated for much of the year, with the roof open to give the best possible experience. The roof can remain open in hot weather and the stadium air-conditioned, due to the integrated design of the bowl, the air systems and the internal environment. When conditions or sporting experience demand, the roof can close. Designed very much with future legacy in mind, building on the energy strategies developed with the Qatar Showcase project, the stadium can be carbon neutral and provide all its own energy over a year. Systems located local to the stadium harness the heat of the sun as well as converting its energy into electricity by photovoltaic panels and solar collector arrays, again harnessing non-fossil energy in this country with plenty of both.
Concourse level beneath the expressed stadium level.
453
Opening roof and structural form of the stadium.
454
Ventilation modes with roof open and closed – natural ventilation and air conditioned modes.
455
Current
456
Singapore Sports Hub Dragages Singapore Pte Ltd
Singapore
457
The Singapore Sports Hub provides a wide range of sports facilities on a waterfront site.
The roof of the National Stadium will be the largest free-span dome in the world when it is completed in 2014.
458
Awards 2013 World Architecture Awards (WAF) Winner, Future Projects Leisure-led Development Category World Architecture Awards (WAF) Shortlisted, Future Projects Masterplanning Category
The Singapore Sports Hub project reflects the ambitions of Singapore, a small, highly urbanised country with a dynamic economy, to become a major centre of world sport. The Sports Hub includes a 55,000 seat National Stadium, designed to house concerts and other events as well as football and athletics, aquatics centre, multi-purpose indoor arenas, and extensive facilities for community sports, along with 40,000 sq.m. of retailing and offices. The 35 hectare waterfront site at Kallang, originally occupied by Singapore’s principal airport and more recently by the now-demolished 1970s National Stadium, is close to the central business district of Singapore and to the airport and served by an excellent metro system. Arup Associates designed the stadium, aquatics centre and arenas in collaboration with engineers and specialists from Arup’s Singapore, UK and Australasia offices. The design of the stadium had to address the sometimes oppressive local climate; hot, humid and with high rainfall. A moveable roof was an essential feature. The moveable section of the roof is clad in ETFE pillows and incorporates a matrix of LED lighting, one of the largest LED screens in the world at 20,000 sq.m. It is designed
to open and close in 25 minutes and is left open when the stadium is not in use, keeping the grass pitch in healthy condition. The fixed sections of the roof have a more conventional metal cladding. Highly insulated, they are, thanks to Arup’s parametric modelling, remarkably lightweight – the total weight of steel used is just over 8000 tonnes. The roof of the stadium, with a span of 310m, is set to become the world’s largest free-span dome when completed in 2014. A radical cooling system has been incorporated. Instead of supplying the cooling air at high level, it is introduced beneath the seat, creating a pillow of cool air around the spectators. By minimising the volume cooled, the energy used is dramatically reduced. Giant louvres provide protection from sun and rain for the grand arcade around the stadium and link the different functions while allowing the free circulation of air. A moving tier of seats can be pulled forward when the athletics track is not in use, to improve proximity to the pitch and to enhance spectator experience and atmosphere. With legacy in mind, the sports hub precinct has been designed to maximise both elite and everyday use, to ensure that it will be an active and vibrant destination throughout the year.
459
The National Stadium is equipped with a movable roof, a response to Singapore’s unpredictable climate.
The roof of the stadium is clad in ETFE “pillows”, fixed sections are highly insulated to exclude heat and humidity.
460
When not in use the athletics track can be covered by a movable bank of seating, providing the proximity to the pitch required at football matches.
461
Current
462
Nanning Beibu Tower Beibu Gulf Bank
Nanning China
463
The headquarters building for Beibu Gulf Bank in Nanning, South China, will be one of the tallest buildings in the region.
464
The brief for the Beibu tower in Nanning (in Guanxi Province, Southern China) provided for a mixed-use building incorporating headquarters for the Beibu Bank, lettable office space, a 5* hotel, and public viewing gallery, with retailing, conference facilities, cinemas and a banking hall at podium level. The building is to be an urban landmark, a showcase for the bank, but also a highly innovative building in terms both of workplace design and sustainability. It should engage with the very mixed urban landscape of Nanning, which includes both high-rise buildings and earlier low-rise development. The site for the 402m tall building is an irregular diamond in shape. Arup Associates’ design strategy, developed by teams from the London and Shanghai offices, divides the building into two triangular volumes, one the tower, the other the 6 storey podium element, divided by a public route across the site. The triangular plan of the tower is sculpted into an elegantly tapered form, unifying the separate
functions it contains, and engineered with both wind and seismic impact in mind. The spatial strategy is linked to the environmental design of the building – offices lower down the tower require more natural light than the hotel rooms towards its summit. Dedicated offices for Beibu Bank occupy floors 7–27, lettable offices floors 28–54, the 324-room hotel floors 57–75, with a clubhouse and observation floor at the top of the tower. The environmental strategy of the building aims to reduce the energy demand for cooling as much as possible, by integrating several strategies in to the building envelope: an active double-skin ventilated façade, incorporating automatic blinds, reduces the solar load to the occupied space; the window to wall ratio is carefully balanced to reduce solar gain while ensuring good views and ample natural light. Sky gardens provide circulation, amenity and social interaction between the floors occupied by Beibu Bank.
The public banking hall (left) is a separate structure which derives its form from the private club at the summit of the tower.
465
Elevation of the tower, a slender tapering addition to the city skyline.
466
Section through the tower showing from the base retail and public areas, lettable office space, bank headquarters, hotel and a private club.
Sketches illustrating the evolution of the floor plans and the relationship between podium and tower.
Public street extends through an atrium connecting the two buildings.
Site plan showing the complex core in the tower (top) and the linked banking hall (bottom).
467
The project is located in the ‘Garden City’ of Nanning.
468
Anatomy of the building showing the mix of uses in the tower and the vertical circulation systems.
Beams & Columns
Core
Beltruss & Outriggers
Structure
Diagram showing the structural build-up of the tower.
469
Pinewood Studios Development Framework Pinewood Shepperton PLC Shepperton, England
King Abdullah Sports City (KASC) Athletics Stadium Saudi Aramco Jeddah, Saudi Arabia Current
Current
AstraZeneca Masterplan Cambridge, England Current
470
Embassy Gardens Ballymore Group London, England Current
Barbican Cultural Quarter Barbican Art Gallery London, England Current
Ohrid Vision Macedonian Government Ohrid, Macedonia Current
Nicolas College Rainbows4Children Mekele, Ethiopea Current
471
472
The Arup Journals A selection
The Arup Journal was launched back in 1966 and, remarkably, has continued to be published ever since with the mission, codified early on, to “present the best of our work and thinking across our constantly growing areas of expertise”. From its very first year that “our” always included the work of Arup Associates alongside that of the parent company – Ove Arup & Partners then (and successively Ove Arup Partnership and now Arup). Founding Partner Sir Philip Dowson contributed his “Architect’s approach to architecture” to what was only the second edition in May 1966, and over the subsequent decades and into the present century The Arup Journal has continued to trace, through its detailed studies of key projects, the development of Arup Associates’ work. Long may it continue!
473
1967 1976
474
475
1979 1982
476
477
1983
478
479
1984
480
481
1988
1989
482
483
1990 1997
484
485
2001 2005
486
487
2010
488
Endmatter
490
Index
494
Credits
489
Mining and Metallurgy University of Birmingham 040
Lloyd’s of London Corporation of Lloyd’s 094
University of Oxford Somerville College 044
Central Electricity Generating Board (CEGB) HQ 100
Snape Maltings Concert Hall Aldeburgh Festival of Music & the Arts 050
Gateway 1 and 2 Wiggins Teape (UK) PLC 108
Horizon Factory John Player & Sons Ltd 060
Briarcliff House (Leslie & Godwin Group) ITC Pension Trust Ltd 126
IBM (UK) Ltd 068 Sir Thomas White Building St John`s College University of Oxford 080 Bush Lane House Trafalgar House Development Ltd (Phase 1) Greycoat PLC (Phase 2) 086
490
1 Finsbury Avenue Greycoat Estates PLC 134 International Garden Festival Hall Merseyside Development Corporation 142 Diplomatic Quarter Sports Club Bureau of Foreign Affairs Saudi Arabia 148
Index
Forbes Mellon Library Clare College University of Cambridge 156
The Gro Newtown Rural Wales and Control Techniques PLC 214
Broadgate Development Liverpool Street British Land Company PLC 162
Stockley Park Stockley Park Consortium Ltd 220
Sussex Grandstand, Goodwood Goodwood Racecourse Ltd 176 Royal Life Peterborough Royal Life Holdings Ltd 190 Istanbul Cultural Center Seat Istanbul Foundation for Culture & Arts 202 Imperial War Museum 206
Watling House Development British Land Company PLC 230 Hong Kong Station Mass Transport Railway Corporation (MTRC) 236 BP Baglan Bay (G8) Showcase BP International Ltd 244 BT Workstyle 2000 British Telecom 254
491
Arup Campus Prologis Kingspark & British Land Company PLC 268 Etihad Stadium (Commonwealth / City of Manchester Stadium) Manchester City Council & Manchester 280 Plantation Place British Land Company PLC 290 Plantation Lane British Land Company PLC 300 Battersea Masterplan Parkview International Ltd PLC 310 Vauxhall Cross Interchange Transport for London 316
British Waterways HQ British Waterways Board 326 CITI Data Centre Citigroup 336 Ropemaker Place British Land Company PLC 348 Insect Hotel Sponsor: British Land Company PLC 358 Qatar Showcase, FIFA Qatar 2022 Bid Committee 364 BSkyB Sky Studios British Sky Broadcasting Ltd / Stanhope PLC 372 Faculty of Engineering and Computing Coventry University 388
492
Index
Sports Centre, Phase 1 University of Cambridge 396
King Abdullah Sports City Saudi Aramco 442
Fourth Plinth Trafalgar Square Royal Society of Arts and Sculpture at Goodwood 402
Doha City Tennis Stadium Qatar Olympic Committee 450
Druk White Lotus School The Drukpa Trust 408 MEEZA Data Centre 418
Singapore Sports Hub Dragages Singapore Pte Ltd 456 Nanning Beibu Tower Beibu Gulf Bank 462
House with No Name Private 422 Istanbul Sabiha Gรถkรงen Control Tower HEAS Inc 430 Jaguar Land Rover Engine Manufacturing Centre UK 436
493
Photography
494
Alan Williams Andrew Putler Caroline Sohie Christian Richters Cityscape Colin Westwood Crispin Boyle Damian Eley Daniel Clement Darren Soh David Kinney David Laing Dennis Gilbert Graham Brandon Graham Flack Grant Smith Hayes Davidson Hufton+Crow Photography Ian Cook James Ward Jason Kennedy Jeff Harkey
Jerry Lee John Donat John Mills Photography Ltd Kilian O’Sullivan Luke Jarvis M Fogarty M Moser and Ben McMillian Martin Charles McAteer Nathan Willock Oaker Peter Cook Peter Defty Peter Macintosh Richard Bryant Richard Dudley / Triangle 2 Richard Stonehouse Simon Kennedy Spice Photos Ltd SPLC SSHC Ltd
Credits and copyright
Text Kenneth Powell Editor Declan O’Carroll Co-editor Michael Beaven
Printed in England, United Kingdom Copyright 2013 Arup Associates No part of this book may be used or reproduced in any form or manner whatsoever without prior written permission except in the case of brief quotations.
Research and production Mick Brundle Joanne Ronaldson Philip Jones Design CHK Design Printing Gavin Martin Colournet Limited
495
ARUP ASSOCIATES
50
496