Integrated Design Report Includes: Report One: Design & Technology Report Two: Management & Law Ben Lillywhite C7138009 8th May 2017 Word Count: 3,425 Masters Of Architecture MArch, Leeds Beckett University http://www.abstractmachine.co.uk/
Contents
Integrated Design Report
Report 1: Design & Technology
Personal Position
Design Studio Context
Design Thesis
Technical & Technological Questions
Further Development
Report 2: Management & Law
Planning Issues
Development Appraisal
Procurement & Risk
Architectural Practice
Professional Reflection
Personal Statement References & List of Illustrations CV
Ben Lillywhite
Page 3
Integrated Design Report
Report One Design & Technology Executive Summary Every year, many hundreds of British soldiers are injured either in combat, training or accidents, with a large percentage being discharged from the Army. In recent years, charities such as Help for Heroes have formed, with the aim of assisting these injured service personnel back into civilian life. The proposed rehabilitation centre, managed and funded by Help for Heroes offers a lifeline to the injured service personnel, both on a local and regional scale. With good transport links both by rail and car, the centre will allow soldiers to stay on site, or attend daily drop-in sessions. Alongside the rehabilitation centre, is a more public face to the scheme, offering a museum and exhibition centre, where work produced by the residents will be displayed. With the opportunity to tell their own stories, it is hoped that the soldiers will be able to integrate back into civilian life easier, with this scheme being used as a spring board to achieve that overall aim. Ben Lillywhite
Page 5
Figure 2 - Kingfisher Court, Hertfordshire - The first project I worked on in practice. The award winning mental health building for adults, consulted with the residents and users across hundreds of hours, to give the building a village like atmosphere.
Personal Position
Integrated Design Report
My architectural position has evolved greatly over the course of my time in practice and studying. If asked at the start of my career, the answer would have been: “developing a space that was suitable to it’s users, making the most of the natural environment.� Whilst this remains one of the primary objectives of any design, I believe that my experience has helped the statement to evolve. I now believe that, as well as understanding the sustainability issues and maximising the environmental factors, a more important factor is to understand exactly what the client wants and who the end user will be. In practice I am primarily involved with healthcare facilities, and have worked on several large mental health schemes. Within these types of facilities it is imperative that the buildings work well for both patients and staff. Whilst we can create buildings that comply with the necessary regulations, it is essential that we co-ordinate with all users to understand their best working practices and ideas. Having spent the past 4 years in practice whilst studying part time, the challenge has being of the utmost benefit to myself. I have experienced the theoretical studies within the university programme, allowed to test a variety of design styles and explore the art of architecture. Whilst being involved within practice has allowed me to understand the requirements of the modern day architect and the day to day struggles and workings. My experiences with healthcare buildings have heavily influenced my time during MArch and inspired my thesis project. Working on the Kingfisher Court (Fig. 2) was fascinating, as the building design moved away from the traditional mental health facility - instead the architects discussed the scheme with residents and created a sense of community, as opposed to a hospital. It is with this community feeling that I have taken into my thesis project.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 7
Figure 3 - Studio Logo
Figure 4 - Rhino and Grasshopper simulations of the Fabrication module
Figure 5&6 - Physical model of the Fabrication module
Design Studio Context
Integrated Design Report
As a member of Abstract Machines throughout my time at university, I have been encouraged to use digital parametric tools, namely Rhino and Grasshopper (Fig. 4) to create a series of quick design iterations, based on a multitude of paramters. The process begins by defining a set of parameters or rules from which the design can focus around. By varying the hierarchy of these parameters, we can evaluate the vast amount of outcomes before feeding the results back into the process and beginning again, to create more efficient systems. In conjunction with the computer technology, we embrace the physical modelling side of architecture, to further test our concepts. By utilising both method simultaneously, an array of designs can be generated in a short period of time, before favoured concepts are physically modelled. I believe there is nothing more important than to physically be able to hold a design, view it from all angles and physically manipulate it. I have thoroughly enjoyed using parametric design methods, especially during the Fabrication module, where I created an intelligent facade system (Fig. 5&6) based on my origami studies. I believe these parametric skills will benefit me as the design tools become more readily available; however, I worry that some members of the industry may become too reliant on the systems and lose the “human touch.�
Ben Lillywhite
Page 9
River Foss
Imphal Barracks
Walmgate Stray
Rive
r Ou
se
Clifford’s Tower
Garbutt House
Figure 7 - York Site Plan (1:5000) - Having given a lot of consideration towards it’s location, the scheme will be situated close to York city centre,as it possesses excellent transport links for a large array of visitors. The train station is just off the page to the east.
Site
Design Thesis
Integrated Design Report
The design proposal is to develop a rehabilitation centre for injured service personnel, located adjacent to the Imphal Barracks, York (Fig. 7). The primary focus of the centre is to assist in the transition from service personnel, back to civilian life, with a range of courses including CV writing, IT skills and physical therapy. The centre is the last stage in the service persons rehabilitation and can provide accommodation for up to 42 people, for courses lasting up to 4 weeks. The scheme aims to create an innovative design that encourages a community atmosphere, yet being accessible to all. It is highly likely that many of the residents may have reduced function of their limbs, require crutches or be in a wheelchair and a key objective is to ensure that their needs and requirements are not neglected. I do not want the Part M compliant design to be perceived as an after thought, but one integral to the project. Help for Heroes manages 5 other centres around the country (Help for Heroes, n.d.), with these centres offering a range of activities and courses. I intend to expand on these services by including a public element to the scheme - further integrating the scheme into it’s context and giving a greater opportunity for the residents to interact with members of the public, aiding in their rehabilitation. I wanted to integrate the public side to offer the soldiers the chance to tell their stories and integrate with the public; whilst also giving the opportunity to the wider public a sense of what these brave soldiers have been through and ways in which they can be assisted. However, with this public element being a new concept, it poses many challenges with the predominant issue being security. The divide between public and private spaces was one of the most challenging problems of the scheme to overcome. The security and welfare of the residents was of the utmost importance and it is essential that the residents feel safe. Therefore the overall layout for the scheme is a difficult proposition - allowing the scheme to feel opening and welcoming in order to entice the public in; whilst still achieving the privacy required of the often vulnerable residents. One way that I aim to achieve this is through the use of materiality - having different colour / material palettes for the private and public areas, acting as a visual guide to both the residents and visitors. Furthermore, careful consideration was given to the plan of the buildings, as described in subsequent pages.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 11
Figure 8 - Origami Model
Figure 9 - Origami Model
Figure 10 - Building Section (1:100) - One of the accommodation buildings showing the structural details of the in-situ cast concrete.
Figure 11 - Building Section - Diagrammatically portraying the day time heating and ventilation strategy.
Technical & Technological Questions
Integrated Design Report
As a member of the Abstract Machines design studio, technology plays a crucial role in our development, as we are constantly looking for ways to make structures more efficient and systems more intelligent. In conjunction with the computer models, the physical models produced have played a vitally important role. Fascinated by origami, the early concept models (Fig. 8&9) focussed around the folding patterns of the ancient art form and I was interested in how the use of material affected the outcomes. I quickly realised that it was papers unique physical properties that allowed it such flexibility in 2D form, yet when folded it displayed impressive compressive strength. Throughout my years in Abstract Machines, I have continued to test my origami techniques in a range of materials and styles. In order to create a sustainable design, thorough research was conducted into the various environmental requirements of each space. Using this information in conjunction with my materials choice - using two different materials to differentiate between public and private spaces - allowed me to develop varying environmental strategies based on time of day and year. In the private buildings, the choice of concrete allowed for a high thermal mass, as well as the complex shapes inspired by the origami forms. Utilising this material allowed the buildings to inherently self regulate themselves, absorbing any excess heat during the day, before slowly releasing it during colder periods (Fig 11.). Recognising that the public buildings will only be utilised during day, I adopted a different environmental approach and materiality. The public buildings are constructed from Structurally Insulated Panels (SIPs) with a timber cladding. These buildings are to only be occupied during the day, meaning night time heating was of less importance. Aiming to create a scheme that was sustainable and energy efficient, the public buildings are designed to maximise allowing natural daylight in, although preventing too much solar gain. In conjunction with a multitude of physical models, I used AutoDesk Revit ( a sophisticated 3D computer modelling programme), in order to test and analysing various elements of the design - such as how the buildings over shadowed one another, and the spaces being generated. Revit also allowed me to develop the technical details and production of my final drawings and images.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 13
Figure 12 - Phoenix House, Catterick - One of five rehabilitation centres managed by Help for Heroes around the country. Purpose built, Phoenix House takes in residents from across the north, from Nottingham to Glasgow, and Northern Ireland (Interview with M. Dickinson).
Figure 13 - Resident’s Entrance - Render of the main residents entrance through the Support Hub and looking onto the Residents’ Centre.
Further Development
Integrated Design Report
Considering the project’s current position, by having the additional time to investigate the effects materials effect rehabilitation would be hugely beneficial. The materials for the private buildings were chosen because they offer a sense of security and privacy to the soldiers. It is plausible that rehabilitation for soldiers differs to rehabilitation for civilians, therefore understanding the differences will be vital. I believe this to be a relatively new discipline, and with the field constantly evolving, the scheme will require flexibility in order to offer it’s most to the residents. The scheme will also be the first opportunity that part of the centre is opened up fully to the public. Through the public landscaping on the scheme, I aim to take the visitors on a journey, to give them an insight into what the soldiers have been through. Therefore, when residents and visitors come together, it will be interesting to see how they interact, and whether this form of rehabilitation will work for future centres. Furthermore, with close proximity to York University, the scheme posses the ability to explore a joint venture with the medical and engineering departments, researching into rehabilitation methods and prosthetics with the residents. The need for this type of facility is ever growing, with new world conflicts being reported by the media almost every week it seems. Therefore, research into additional sites around the country and research into the requirements of injured service personnel are equally important to ensure the future safety our injured soldiers deserve.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 15
Integrated Design Report
Report Two Management & Law Executive Summary With 5 other centres across the country, the scheme should be granted planning permission in principle, however, it will all come down to the design. Despite the design being complex, the surrounding context has derived the public face of the buildings. At a construction cost of nearly £11 million, the scheme offers value for money. Providing a large landscaped garden for members of the public to visit, adjacent to the Walmgate Stray, the proposal is designed to enhance the local community and benefit it’s neighbours. This is further evidenced by the choice of local contractors and materials, to bolster the local economy. Utilising a mixture of on and off site construction; time delays are sought to be minimised, with risks reduced on site by reducing the amount of construction methods at once.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 17
Figure 14 - Planning Approval Public Consultation - A Public Consultation will begin to generate word of mouth about the project and help to allay any worries that the surrounding households may have about the scheme. It will demonstrate that the scheme is to not only to provide assistance to the visiting injured soldiers; but in the wider context of bringing the barracks and the public together.
Figure 15 - View of Public Gardens and Boundary Wall
Figure 16 - Site Security and Ownership - Previously, the whole site will have been part of the barracks. However, the new secure line for the barracks runs along the northern edge of the site, shown in the grey dotted line and the area is highlighted in grey. The secure private boundary for the scheme is shown in the blue dotted line - this represents the resident and staff access only area, although the rights of way will need to be given to the barracks. Highlighted in light blue is the visitors area part of the scheme. A new rights of way will need to be granted to the barracks.
Planning Issues
Integrated Design Report
With five other schemes of a similar nature around the country (Help for Heroes, n.d.), I believe the type of facility will be acceptable for the planners in principle. Due to the nature of this building, and it being adjacent to the residential area and Imphal Barracks, it would be advantageous to submit a “Pre-Planning Application.” Furthermore, by holding discussions with City of York planners and a Public Consultation (Fig. 14), I can understand any issues that may arise and ease any initial worries they may have. Although I believe the scheme to be acceptable in principle, the contentious issue may be the design. The buildings are designed to be a celebration of the journey that the residents have been on and how far they have come. However, to help tie the scheme into it’s context and surrounding area, the public buildings and the boundary wall (Fig. 15) shield the faceted buildings from public view, and increase privacy and security for the residents. The chosen site is currently part of the Imphal Barracks, a site owned by the Ministry of Defence (MoD). The current proposal is for the barracks and the scheme to have a shared access route; however, this may be deemed to be unsuitable by the MoD for security reasons. Therefore a separate access route and parking may be required. There is precedence for the former option in the Help for Heroes managed Phoenix House, Catterick1. Furthermore, establishing a new public right of way through the site may prove problematic for the MoD, again because of the potential security issues. However, there is already an existing playing fields immediately adjacent to the site, with public right of way, which would prove to be a useful argument. Due to the nature of the building, Approved Document (AD) Part M (NBS, 2016) and the British Standard BS 8300 will prove to be hugely influential in my design. They obviously play a major role in all buildings constructed in Britain, however, with the proposed scheme being built for potentially a large amount of disabled users, understanding these documents is essential in order to allow the regulations to be hacked in the Abstract Machines spirit.
1. Phoenix House is built on land that was given to Help for Heroes by the MoD. The site was previously a part of Catterick Barracks, before being subdivided to provide the site for Phoenix House. Both sites share a perimeter fence, with both having secure entry points. I learnt this through an interview with Phoenix House Centre Manager, Melanie Dickinson, on my visit to the centre.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 19
Figure 17 - Site Plan (1:1250)
Development Appraisal Scenario
Integrated Design Report
As discussed previously, the client will be the military charity, Help for Heroes, who will finance and manage the facility on behalf of the MoD. The charity receive donations from members of the public and their recently built Phoenix House cost £12 million to build (Help for Heroes, n.d.), predominantly funded by charitable donations. The proposed scheme will be the first time that Help for Heroes will essentially fully open their doors to the public². It is hoped that increasing the public awareness, additional monies will be raised in order to assist in the long term maintenance of not only the proposed scheme; but the other Help for Heroes managed centres around the country. At present, the site is the owned by the MoD. The proposal is for the site to be separated from Imphal Barracks and sold to the charity, as was the case with Phoenix House. This should be a relatively straight forward procedure; however the implementation of a new secure boundary for the barracks will be required, with the guard house also having to be moved. To estimate the construction cost and fees of the scheme, I used Spon’s Architects’ and Builders’ Pricing Book (Langdon, D. 2014). The scheme is quite difficult to categorise under the Spons’ headings for cost estimates; however as the largest component of the scheme is the residential aspect, I used the “Homes for the Physically Handicapped” category. This gives a guide price of between £1,175 to £1,475 per m² Costs for offices are substantially higher than this price, however estimates for the gymnasium have a lower per m² price. However, due to the complexity of a portion of the design and the specialist furniture required, I have increased the cost per m² to £2,200 per m². Using a cost of £2,200 per m² and a net internal area of 4,081m², the total construction comes to £8,978,200. However, there is also a substantial amount of landscaping (Fig. 17). Researching similar schemes³ a budget of £2 million has been given to the landscaping budget. Therefore, the scheme comes to £10,978,000. Comparing this to the construction costs of other centres4, the proposal offers value for money. Although additional money has been spent on the complexity of the design, I believe the celebration of the residents’ journey and the joy the buildings could generate is worth it. Furthermore, the costs are likely to be offset by the extra capital raised from the public visiting and donating to the site.
2. Whilst the charity welcomes volunteers to come and help with their projects; their sites are all secure premises, with permission needing to be sought from the centre manager in order to gain entry. 3. KLA, Drapersfield as part of the Olympic Legacy (ArchDaily, 2016). 4. Both Phoenix House and my scheme offer similar areas in terms of resident accommodation and activities, although my proposal includes the additional public elements.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 21
Phase 1 - 1
Phase 1 - 2
Phase 1 - 3
Phase 1 - 4
Phase 2 - 1
Phase 2 - 2
Figure 18 - Construction Sequence Process - The above diagrams portray the construction sequence on site. By allowing the SIPs buildings to be manufactured off site, additional space is given to the contractor during the construction of the concrete buildings; as well as reducing any time delays as the SIPs are manufactured in controlled conditions.. When the concrete buildings are erected and the curtain walling in place, the public buildings are brought to site. This signifies commencement of phase 2.
Procurement & Risk
Integrated Design Report
Having decided that for design reasons I would use two different construction materials, I subsequently decided to use two different construction techniques (Fig. 18). This was to allow for the concrete contractors to be on site and in order to avoid delays, have the SIPs being manufactured under factory controlled conditions off site. The decision also reduces the risk of having various disciples on site at the same time, freeing up available space. Furthermore, where ever possible, local contractors and materials will be sought to further enhance the scheme’s sustainable beliefs and boost the local economy. Having two main contractors on separate buildings may prove difficult, and therefore discussions will need to be conducted. My preference would be for the concrete contractors to be the principal and main contractor due to their continuous presence on site, with the SIPs manufacturer being a sub contractor. Due to the complex nature of the concrete form work and design, I believe a specialist concrete contractor will be required to ensure that the final finish is adequate and structurally safe. I propose to use a self compacting concrete, which although more expensive, initially, will offer a cost saving by reducing the need to use other compacting machinery, avoiding additional equipment and staff on site, hopefully creating a safer environment. By completing the Structurally Insulated Panels (SIPs) within factory controlled conditions, it avoids the risk of weather being a deciding factor in time scales. Furthermore, the work will be carried out by specially trained staff, ensuring a high quality product. When the products are completed and ready, they can be stored within the factory until they are required on site, reducing the amount of storage need on site. A landscaping contractor will be required to carry out the proposed landscaping scheme. I believe that the actual site work will be carried out by unskilled labourers, however the work will be overseen by specialist contractors ensuring the work is to a high quality. To ensure overall site safety and that the design is to a high quality, a Building Control Officer and Clerk of Works will be regularly on site, to a regular point of contact. This will also ensure that the design is completed to current building regulations, as well as the architect’s details. The intention is to use Building Information Modelling (BIM) for the project, due to detect any possible clashes between disciplines in the design, hopefully creating a smoother on site project. Furthermore, the use of BIM will then allow for the facilities management to have a greater understanding of the building and use their usage information when designing future schemes.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 23
Figure 19 - Building Plan (1:750)
Architectural Practice
Integrated Design Report
To ensure a successful project, I would encourage the Client to be consulted at an early stage, to fully understand their briefing requirements. I would therefore urge for us to be appointed from Stage 0 according to the RIBA Plan of Works 2013 (RIBA, 2013), to allow us a continuous presence throughout the process and ensure the Client gets the final building they want. During Stages 0 - 1, limited resources will be require. In the Appraisal Scenario, I calculated a construction value of ÂŁ10,978,000. Based on a fee of 6%, as is recommended for healthcare buildings (RIBA, n.d.), of the construction cost, a fee of ÂŁ658,680 is calculated. However, in order to be more competitive, a smaller percentage, such as the minimum 5.5% may be used in order to create a lower fee - this would be need to be discussed with various other directors to ensure the board likewise agree. I would propose to use a Traditional form of contract, unless the Client expects to create a series of these centres across the country, where I would recommend a Framework agreement5. For the purposes of this standalone scheme, I would assume the Traditional Contract would be the preferred route. This would therefore mean that during stages 2 - 4, resources would need to continually grow, especially during the Design Development and Technical Design stages. This is to ensure that a sufficient tender package can be created. It is then assumed that during the construction phases, a lower amount of resources will be required as most of the detailing should have been completed. Due to my experience of utilising BIM technologies, I recognise that the amount of work required at the different stages, differs to the traditional methods (RIBA, n.d.). Therefore, resources and fee should be favoured for more work up front due to the increased demands placed on the practice. This may pose challenging for the Client, as they are seeing little construction work for their outlay, so the process and benefits will need to be explained for the Client to favour the BIM method.
5. If the Client wished to create a series of these buildings across the country, a framework agreement may be put in place with a design team. Whilst this would allow for continuation for the Client, it deviates from having local contractors carrying out the work.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 25
Figure 20 - FitzRoy House, Northampton - Mental hospital for children and adolescence. I have been working on the scheme for the past 3 years and it has recently being handed over and occupied.
Figure 21 - FitzRoy House, Northampton - Mental hospital for children and adolescence. I have been working on the scheme for the past 3 years and it has recently being handed over and occupied.
Figure 22 - North Middlesex Maternity Hospital
Professional Reflection
Integrated Design Report
I have had the good fortune of being able to study for my masters part time, whilst working within the field of my chosen career on fascinating and award winning projects. Healthcare architecture had not being a field I had considered until I began to work at P+HS Architects, however after being given the opportunity, I am now extremely grateful and pleased to be working in a sector of the industry that has the potential to help so many people - both in the patient experience and the working environment for the staff. I hope to continue working with the practice for many years to come on many large scale projects, and look forward to being the lead architect on these schemes. My immediate aim after gaining my Part 2 qualification is to begin my Part 3 studies in earnest, as I have already begun working on my case study project. Following completion of my Part 3, I hope to one day become an Associate within the practice, overseeing my team’s projects whilst helping in the day to day running of the office. As my knowledge and expertise in mental health architecture grows, I would like to establish myself onto one of the bodies’ boards, such as the Design in Mental Health Network. This will then allow me to be at the forefront of improving design for patient’s and staff, bringing in new jobs and contacts to the practice. Finally, I hope to see more of the rehabilitation centres being constructed across the country. Having worked on this project for the past two years, I believe it to be an extremely worthwhile cause, and would very much welcome the opportunity to realise the scheme.
Ben Lillywhite
Page 27
References
Websites: Arch Daily (2016). Drapers Field / Kinnear Landscape Architects 06 Jul 2016 [Online]. Available from: <http://www.archdaily.com/790783/drapers-field-kinnear-landscape-architects/> [Accessed 21 March 2017]. Help for Heroes (n.d.) How to access our services [Online]. Salisbury: Help for Heroes. Available from: <http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/get-support/how-to-access-our-services/> [Accessed 1st September2016]. Ministry of Defence (2011). Catterick recovery centre up and running [Online]. Available from: < https:// www.gov.uk/government/news/catterick-recovery-centre-up-and-running> [Accessed 20 March 2017]. RIBA (2013). RIBA Plan of Work 2013 [Online]. London: RIBA. Available from < https://www. ribaplanofwork.com/PlanOfWork.aspx> [Accessed 21 March 2017]. RIBA (n.d.). Fee calculation, negotiation and management for architects [Online]. London: RIBA. Available from < https://www.architecture.com/Files/RIBAProfessionalServices/Regions/NorthWest/ Education/Part%203/StudyPacks2013/March2013LectureNotes/FeeCalculation,NegotiationandManage ment-AdrianDobson.pdf> [Accessed 24 March 2017]. Books: NBS (2016). Approved Document M Volume 1 2015. Newcastle Upon Tyne: NBS. Langdon, D. ed, 2014. Sponâ&#x20AC;&#x2122;s Architects and Builders Price Book 2014 [e-book]. Abingdon, Oxon: CRC Press. Available through: Leeds Beckett University Library Catalogue: [Accessed 21 March 2017]. Interview: Held an interview with Melanie Dickinson (Centre Manager) and Robert Pearson (Facilities Manager) at Phoenix House, Catterick. This was a very insightful interview with both Melanie and Robert providing me with a lot of information including what they would have liked to have seen incorporated to make Phoenix House even better; how Phoenix House came about and the construction process; Phoenix House drawings, a tour of the facility and future developments.
List of Illustrations
Integrated Design Report
Figures 1 & 13 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Render of Main Residentsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Entrance. [Own image]. [Created: 14 April 2017]. Figure 2 - Kingfisher Court (2014) [Online Image]. Available from: http://pandhs.co.uk/projects/project/kingfishercourt. [Accessed: 1 September 2016]. Figure 3 - Lillywhite, B. (2016) Abstract Machines Logo. [Own image]. [Created: 1 September 2016]. Figure 4 - Lillywhite, B. (2014) CAD models of Fabrication Experiments. [Own image]. [Created: 18/03/2014]. Figures 5 & 6 - Lillywhite, B. (2014) Physical Model of Fabrication Experiments. [Own Photograph]. [Created: 22/04/2014]. Figure 7 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Site Plan of York. [Own image, from Digimap download]. [Created: 21/04/2017]. Figures 8 & 9 - Lillywhite, B. (2016) Origami Models. [Own Photograph]. [Created: 19/11/2015]. Figure 10 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Building Section Model. [Own image]. [Created: 07/04/2017]. Figure 11 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Building Section Diagram. [Own Diagram]. [Created: 08/04/2017]. Figure 12 - Phoenix House (2015) [Online Image]. Available from: http://www.helpforheroes.org.uk/news/2015/ may/hidden-wounds-launches-at-phoenix-house-catterick/ [Accessed: 24 October 2015]. Figure 14 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Public Consultation Diagram. [Own Diagram]. [Created: 22 April 2017]. Figure 15 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Render of Visitorsâ&#x20AC;&#x2122; Landscape. [Own image]. [Created: 14 April 2017]. Figure 16 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Land Ownership. [Own image]. [Created: 23 March 2017]. Figure 17 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Site Plan. [Own image]. [Created: 21 March 2017]. Figure 18 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Construction Sequence Diagram. [Own Diagram]. [Created: 14 March 2017]. Figure 19 - Lillywhite, B. (2017) Building Plan. [Own image]. [Created: 21 March 2017]. Figure 20 - FitzRoy House (2016) [Online Image]. Available from: https://pbs.twimg.com/media/ Cn31NFDWgAAjVtk.jpg [Accessed: 1 September 2016]. Figure 21 - FitzRoy House (2017) [Online Image]. Available from: http://pandhs.co.uk/projects/project/fitzroyhouse4 [Accessed: 22 April 2017]. Figure 22 - North Middlesex Hospital (2014) [Online Image]. Available from: http://www.ukconstructionmedia. co.uk/sectors/kier-construction-handover-women-childrens-centre/ [Accessed 1 September 2016].
Ben Lillywhite
Page 29
CV Photo
Benjamin David Lillywhite 7 Blackthorn Road, Northallerton, DL7 8WB
D.O.B: 18th February 1990 Mobile: 07955 993596 E-mail: benlillywhite@hotmail.co.uk Website: https://benlillywhiteportfolio.wordpress.com/ & https://issuu.com/benlillywhite
Profile: I have been working with P+HS Architects in their head office in Stokesley, North Yorkshire, since early 2013, assisting in the delivery of several healthcare schemes varying in sizes. During this time, I have been working towards gaining my Part II qualifications and have thoroughly enjoyed studying alongside working in practice. Experience:
Skills:
Ramsden Barrett Architects May 2005 Two week work experience period, challenged with designing a bespoke dwelling, under the tutelage of an experienced architect. Very rewarding experience gaining an insight into the industry as well as computer and presentational skills.
AutoDesk Revit, AutoCAD, Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, InDesign, Microsoft Office, Google SketchUp, ADB, Rhinoceros 5 with Grasshopper, Model Making, Hand Sketching
P+HS Architects February 2013 - Present Began with a six month placement during my Part 1 year out studies to assist in the drawing production of Kingfisher Court (2015 Design in Mental Health, Project of the Year). Continued to work for the practice during my Part 2 studies on several schemes, including FitzRoy house, Northampton, and the ongoing works at James Cook University Hospital, Middlesbrough.
Other Experiences:
Strengths:
Northumbria University Alumni Association - November 2009
Hard working; equally at home working alone or as part of a larger team; time keeping; enthusiastic.
Fahrenheit Stove Installations - September 2011 - February 2013 Sherburn Aero Club - September 2011 - September 2013 Education:
Other:
Leeds Beckett University Masters of Architecture, MArch (2012 - Present) Full driving licence Northumbria University BA Hons (2008-2011) - 2:2 Degree Read School A-Levels (2006-2008) - 4 A2 Levels (A-C inc. Maths, Business Studies, Physics, Design Technology) Read School GCSE’s (2001-2006) - 12 GCSE’s (7A’s, 5B’s including Maths, English and Sciences References: Angela Rossi Associate, P+HS Architects
Adrian Taylor Director, P+HS Architects
The Old Station, Station Road, Stokesley, TS97AB
The Old Station, Station Road, Stokesley, TS97AB
a.rossi@pandhs.co.uk 01642712684
a.taylor@pandhs.co.uk 01642712684
CSCS card